AARoads Forum

Post merges.  Changing the wording and meaning of posts.  IMO, this is one of the most overmoderated forums on the internet.  The guitar forums that I frequent have many more posters, and are far less moderated.  I think some of the mods here have too much time on their hands and this is their entire life.  Opinions?

I don't think the forum is over-moderated as a whole, but in some cases I feel the moderators have been a bit too quick to declare threads "beyond salvage" and lock them permanently.  In many cases it would work better to lock threads temporarily for a cooling-off period (say 48 to 72 hours) to head off situations where the moderator chimes in with a warning, people still "post hot" because there is no enforced cooling-off, and then the moderators are forced to lock the thread permanently.

I also continue to think that the moderation process itself would be less controversial if moderators were elected for fixed-length terms and were thus subject to democratic accountability.

No, I don't think so. There's a large, even disproportionate ratio of moderators, to members, but that doesn't mean the forum is constricting us much. Anything else is set out in the rules, which forbids conversation of certain topics.

I moderate at another board, and it's annoying to see two concurrent threads with the same topic, and it also is rather tricky to permit a second conversation within the same thread (although both cases are typically best handled on a case-by-case basis).

I rarely edit out people's posts (at the other forum), but on the other hand, if the post contains zero worth, it should be deleted altogether; whereas a post with a lot of merit and one goof-up would be a candidate for editing. There's very few questionable posts here, though...the maturity level is greater here.

Maybe it's because I stick to more-lighthearted threads and conversations that I don't see much of this. But the biggest thing I see is that the thread devolves into politics, and even though it may be difficult to completely avoid the topic (no magic road goblins exist), the rules are the rules.

Nah, the moderators are pretty passive here, and most of the stuff they do enforce is just formatting stuff.  That keeps the forum looking nice and fosters a mature attitude and a higher quality of discussion.

Elected moderators aren't really of any value, I don't think, and would probably just stir the pot more than necessary.

I made several replies to a post.  Each reply was separate, and contained unique content from the other post.  Of course, the AARoads politburo combined all the posts into a single post, which removed all of its meaning and made it look like a mess.  Not to mention a quoting nightmare.  What's the point of doing this?  It added nothing to the conversation and took away some of the power of my posts.  None of the many other forums that I'm a member of do this.  It sounds to me like the moderators have way too much time on their hands.  The two most guilty parties happen to both be good friends of mine, so I'm not picking on somebody because I don't like them, I have a genuine gripe with the way they moderate.

Quote from: corco on November 28, 2012, 12:33:08 PMElected moderators aren't really of any value, I don't think, and would probably just stir the pot more than necessary.

Have you ever participated in a forum that has moderators elected to fixed-length terms?  If not, then what prompts you to think election of moderators would not be of any value, or would lead to more pot-stirring?

I don't have a specific problem with multiple posts, but also doesn't take much effort to edit the same post and cut-and-paste multiple quotes.

Some of the very large city-related forums I frequent hold elections to vote on moderators yearly. Wikipedia holds votes for administrators, with a lengthy Q&A session proceeding it. It's fairly common - but I'm not sure this forum is that big or established to do that yet.

That said, it would be nice to be able to "report a moderator" (of a different forum) if they may get out of line. Being "warned" that "warning" other moderators is a sin is fairly downputting and only breeds bad moderation and a fly-by-night service.

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 28, 2012, 02:03:46 PM
That said, it would be nice to be able to "report a moderator" (of a different forum) if they may get out of line. Being "warned" that "warning" other moderators is a sin is fairly downputting and only breeds bad moderation and a fly-by-night service.

If you have an issue with a moderator's action, feel free to take it up with them or an admin via PM. This is a general rule on any forum. If it's a legitimate concern the staff will usually be very willing to help work something out.

---

bugo, It's very easy to separate a post into multiple parts that still retain different ideas, like this post I'm writing right now. I broke it up with horizontal rules and a quote if necessary to declare who each section is intended for. A post need not be limited to only one idea.
The traditional reason for merging double posts is to limit people's post counts. I've been on other sites where people try to artificially inflate their post count to make themselves seem a more important member - i.e. the more posts I have, the more important I am.
Then there's also the issue of excess junk like having to scroll past your signature and avatar and profile information 9 times instead of just 1.

---

Re:This whole thread,
This is the least moderated forum I post on. Discussions get out of line far too often, and drama always ensues if anyone says so. Most other forums I frequent will just delete something that didn't need to be posted, no questions asked.

You must post to some forums with fascist moderators then.  A good moderator is rarely seen.  There are hardly any threads on this board that haven't been tinkered with by a moderator.  It beats all I've ever seen.

Maybe that's not the fault of the moderators, but rather can be blamed on having a rowdy bunch who post here?

No, because this group is very respectful and there are very few fights.  This one lays squarely on the moderators.  They simply have too much time on their hands and the power has gone to their heads.  Look, I was a mod here for a while.  I barely did anything.  I didn't think I needed to.  Like I said, the best moderator is an invisible one.

I don't think there's anything wrong with merging posts and with expecting users to consolidate their replies whenever feasible. It simply clutters up the board less. Sure, sometimes two replies in a row can be no big deal; most often I think that's the type of thing that happens when you reply without having read the whole thread, or without realizing there's another page to a thread, and then after you post your comments you see another post to which you want to reply and so you do. That's understandable and I think if it's an occasional thing, it's not really any big deal–although, as "formulanone" said, it's very easy to edit a previous comment to include your next post by hitting "Ctrl-A" to select all the text, "Ctrl-X" to cut it, then click "Modify" on your other post and go to the end and paste in the text. (I've always thought sometimes people don't do this because they think someone might be replying to a post already made and that the edited thoughts might get lost.)

Obviously it's also perfectly legitimate to have multiple posts in a row if your comments are made a couple of days apart, or maybe even several hours apart if you have something significantly new that wouldn't fit in the previous post. The "Northern Virginia HOT lanes" thread has been a good example of that because it was a discussion of four new express lanes that just opened less than two weeks ago, so understandably as we drove them for the first few times we had various new comments and updates.

I think part of what becomes a nuisance for people is when you get six replies in a row by the same person responding to already-existing posts one at a time instead of consolidating them. There's something to the idea of reading the thread and trying to respond to multiple things together. It might even change what you were going to say.

I agree that on the whole I think this forum is not highly moderated at all in terms of controlling what people say, as opposed to managing the way stuff is posted. That is, I've been on a forum where the moderators imposed word filters to screen out any profanity and they went overboard to the point that if you used a single objectionable word, it censored any other perfectly legitimate word that contained an objectionable set of letters–e.g., if you tried to say "shit," it censored that and then it would also censor the word "Saturday" because it contains "turd." As "deathtopumpkins" notes, on some sites they simply delete things or lock them, and I've visited sites where moderators are quick to ban people (although, to her credit, I also someone who runs a hockey chat site and always posts a sticky thread explaining the reasons for banning whenever she does it).

Seems to me that most posters here (with the notable exception of the late, unlamented ethanman62187) tend to be more rational and the discussion more mature such that content-based moderation isn't really needed. No doubt a large part of that has to do with the nature of the subject matter on this forum–I mean, a forum where people discuss roads and road signs is going to attract a very different crowd from a forum discussing college football, right?!

I can also refer you to examples of sites that need forum moderators to become more active, especially a local Northern Virginia forum where half the threads consist of racist sniping back and forth. Ugh.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 28, 2012, 04:17:59 PM
bugo, It's very easy to separate a post into multiple parts that still retain different ideas, like this post I'm writing right now. I broke it up with horizontal rules and a quote if necessary to declare who each section is intended for. A post need not be limited to only one idea.
The traditional reason for merging double posts is to limit people's post counts. I've been on other sites where people try to artificially inflate their post count to make themselves seem a more important member - i.e. the more posts I have, the more important I am.
Then there's also the issue of excess junk like having to scroll past your signature and avatar and profile information 9 times instead of just 1.

I'm with death here about 9 posts in a row.  Now, it those posts were made over 9 days, then yes, I'd leave them alone and not merge them (I will never merge something as long as there is 24 hours between the posts).  As for 9 posts in a row in a span of 9 minutes, I'll merge those every time.  There is an edit button for a reason, plus, when you're making the original post, if you scroll down some, there are links to insert quotes from other posts with ease.

Oh, and BTW, the mod we have installed that allows us to merge posts, allows us to auto-merge if we want to without mod interaction when double posts happen.  But we leave that option off because we trust everybody here and only merge stuff when it's warranted.

I don't know if SMF has the option, but some forums I'm on will have a "multi-quote" option, with the multiple selected quotes automatically appearing when the poster hits the reply button. Having said that, no, I don't think the moderators over-moderate here.

Quote from: Takumi on November 28, 2012, 05:02:49 PM
I don't know if SMF has the option, but some forums I'm on will have a "multi-quote" option, with the multiple selected quotes automatically appearing when the poster hits the reply button.

No, SMF doesn't have that option built in.  There are some mods out there to add that feature, but we don't have any of them installed.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 28, 2012, 04:17:59 PMThis is the least moderated forum I post on. Discussions get out of line far too often, and drama always ensues if anyone says so. Most other forums I frequent will just delete something that didn't need to be posted, no questions asked.

I think that SSC is less moderated (it seems almost anarchist, though a word will silence) and that SABRE, while fixing bad formatting and doing some moving and splitting of threads is also less strict. But, even so, this isn't that heavy handed - how long did it take before the purple broke out reminding of the forum rules after bugo's 9 posts? He was allowed another two rants at least.

Also, here off topic stuff is moved, not deleted. Moderators discuss their reasons behind changes. It's far from heavy handed, though it's not as liberal as others.

I definitely hope you're not the one person who voted "Yes," Bugo. :rolleyes:

I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

The moderation here is transparent which is more than I can say for many other forums I frequent. And I've never had any issues with them editing my posts, other than fixing a formatting issue like a missing end-quote tag.

I will say that much of my posting is done from an iPad which makes replying to multiple comments in a single reply near impossible. I am guilty of replying two or three separate times in a row to different posts. The mods have been tolerant of that in my experience.

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

You asked for opinions and people are giving them. If you don't like the opinions, then don't read the thread.

I'm sure what I do for a living factors into my outlook, but I recognize that it's a privately-owned forum and that the people who own and operate it can run it however they see fit. You don't have any First Amendment rights in a private forum and the solution if you don't like the way a forum is run is simple–you either suck it up and accept it or you leave. I've known people who have argued with moderators and then asked that their accounts be deleted (although usually the posts remain).

BTW, regarding moderators fixing quotes and such, everyone makes mistakes occasionally (especially if you're posting via mobile device, and even more so if that device is a phone and not a tablet), but there is a sticky notice at the top of the forum admonishing users to take care when dealing with quoted material and offering help on how to do it.

When I ==USUALLY== have more than one thing to say I make a new line, type [hr], and start typing on the next line, like this:

---

See?

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Give this a try http://survivorsucks.com/forums/79/Off-Topic

As someone in the classic tv show "You Can't Do that on Television" said: "I don't know" and got green slime dumped on the head.

I don't think then AARoads is too moderated.  I guess I might made some ennemies on Toonzone if I said then AARoads is more open-minded then Toonzone forums. ^^;

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Comrade:
I will ask that you NOT lump us all together as you appear to be doing.  :eyebrow:

Oh, and it's "Road Scholar", thank you very much.  :spin:

Quote from: US71 on November 28, 2012, 09:53:26 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Comrade:
I will ask that you NOT lump us all together as you appear to be doing.  :eyebrow:

Oh, and it's "Road Scholar", thank you very much.  :spin:

If "bugo" isn't a roadgeek and isn't a Road Scholar, does that make him a viatologist?   :hmmm:

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 28, 2012, 10:10:28 PM

Quote from: US71 on November 28, 2012, 09:53:26 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Comrade:
I will ask that you NOT lump us all together as you appear to be doing.  :eyebrow:

Oh, and it's "Road Scholar", thank you very much.  :spin:

If "bugo" isn't a roadgeek and isn't a Road Scholar, does that make him a viatologist?   :hmmm:

I go by "highway enthusiast," myself. FWIW

I'm more of a well-wisher. Okay...probably some form of roadgeek.

Whatever you call it, the important thing is to keep in mind the difference between those here for geeky reasons and those here for political reasons.

The is the least moderated forum I'm on.  That said, the moderation is much more visible; what would be handled silently on most forums is emblazed with purple text for all to see here.  I think that's where the over-moderation perception comes from.

And bugo, using separate posts does not give the posts any additional meaning.  It just spams up the forum.  It's not email.

Nine separate posts just hinders readability- I logged in when that went down and my entire recent posts list was filled with your replies to the same thread. That doesn't help me know what's going on, and I immediately saw that and was like "that's not going to go over well." It just harms readability.

You might ask "who cares?" to that, but if readability goes down, quality of discussion will go with it. It's the same reason chatspeak is frowned upon- it makes it harder to read which inevitably lowers the quality of discussion. It's not that nine posts in a row is bad, it's the effects of nine posts in a row, and what happens if that becomes acceptable. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think it's drawn appropriately 95% of the time here.

Go look at the rest of the internet- a lot of it sucks. If you like the unmoderated style of MTR, that's still there, but personally I like this a hell of a lot better.

QuoteHave you ever participated in a forum that has moderators elected to fixed-length terms?  If not, then what prompts you to think election of moderators would not be of any value, or would lead to more pot-stirring?

Honestly, I haven't. The way I look at it is that there's no reason for moderation to be discussed beyond a semi-annual airing of grievance thread like this one if it's being done effectively. Maybe I'm really off mark here, but I feel like too much discussion of moderation just creates a situation where everybody spends all their time thinking about the moderators. I would also worry about it turning into a popularity contest of sorts. I'd rather have them be invisible and go somewhere else if I don't like them. That said, I realize I've never actually experienced it so I could be totally off mark.

Quote from: corco on November 29, 2012, 11:47:53 AM
Nine separate posts just hinders readability- I logged in when that went down and my entire recent posts list was filled with your replies to the same thread. That doesn't help me know what's going on, and I immediately saw that and was like "that's not going to go over well." It just harms readability.

....

The material in boldface is an excellent point. I didn't see all this happen, but I use that "recent posts" feature quite a bit and if I see multiple posts by several users in the same thread, it suggests there's probably a good discussion going on (whether I then view it depends on what it is, of course).

I'm sure some people don't use that feature and don't care, just as on another forum the moderator was surprised when several of us said we wanted him to restore the feature that shows a different icon for threads in which you have posted. He just assumed people know where they've posted in the past (not necessarily valid when someone resurrects a long-dormant thread). But the fact that one user doesn't use a feature doesn't mean he should ruin its use for everyone else.

Quote from: corco on November 29, 2012, 11:47:53 AMHonestly, I haven't. The way I look at it is that there's no reason for moderation to be discussed beyond a semi-annual airing of grievance thread like this one if it's being done effectively. Maybe I'm really off mark here, but I feel like too much discussion of moderation just creates a situation where everybody spends all their time thinking about the moderators. I would also worry about it turning into a popularity contest of sorts. I'd rather have them be invisible and go somewhere else if I don't like them. That said, I realize I've never actually experienced it so I could be totally off mark.

I have had some experience with elected moderators with SABRE and I think the idea works quite well in practice.  The popularity-contest aspect is lessened by confining electioneering to an Elections and Canvassing board on the forum which is visible only during a defined campaigning period and is moderated by the SABRE president (in his capacity as elections officer), not by the moderating team.  There is a reasonable compromise between turnover and retention, so the "talent pool" (people with the skillsets required to moderate effectively) gets deeper in time while institutional memory is not lost.  In most years there is healthy competition for posts.  Moderators are answerable to the Site Manager (head of the moderating team), and can also be removed by a confidence vote, resignation, or failure to re-elect.  This makes members of the forum more willing to heed moderators since they can see that they have a democratic mandate, and it also gives them recourse in situations where a moderator is being blatantly unreasonable or is using his position to further personal grudges.  It also gives members of the forum a chance to see if they can improve the way things are run.  Not all good ideas come from above; if existing management sort of likes an idea that you suggest to them but is not willing to break routine to try it out, then the idea doesn't get tried unless you get elected to do it yourself.

To be perfectly honest, I am not seeing a lot of pressure right now for election of moderators on this forum, because it has been working quite well so far as a benevolent dictatorship.  The moderators are also further along on a learning curve and I would say that, overall, moderation is more effective now than it was a year or two years ago.  But I still argue that election of moderators (if run according to a well-designed process) would be a positive development because it provides a mechanism for accommodating normal turnover of moderators without favoritism.  (Some people just get tired or busy, don't want to bother with post merges, etc.)  When an existing moderator decides to retire, who gets handed the brass ring?  Can you request appointment as a moderator, or is merely asking sufficient to get you blackballed?

There are also some aspects of forum governance which are far from transparent.  For example, it is widely known that this forum has an equivalent of the SABRE Committee board, where difficult problems of moderation and member behavior are discussed in confidence, but nobody seems to know how the membership of this committee is formed.  (In SABRE this information is available to all members since SABRE Committee is encoded as a membership category on our phpBB board.)  And as far as I know, the only two ways to figure out who is a moderator on this forum is to read the moderator listings for individual boards or to look for a "Moderator" or "Global Moderator" tag in the profile information to the left of a given member's posts.  This means that when a person with moderator authority, such as Steve, chooses not to be identified as a board moderator and not to wear a "Moderator" tag, people don't know he or she is actually a moderator unless they are reminded by someone in the know.  In SABRE moderators are clearly distinguished by the color in which their screen names appear, by an office-held tag immediately underneath, and by being listed on a management page (http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/society/management.shtml) which is reached by an easy bread-crumb trail from the main page.

Quote from: NE2 on November 29, 2012, 05:49:11 AM
Whatever you call it, the important thing is to keep in mind the difference between those here for geeky reasons and those here for political reasons.

Are you talking R vs D politics or nerd-grudges within the roadgeek community? I'm here to satiate my nerdy interest in roads but, not being active in the greater roadgeek community, I have no idea if it's cliquish or not.

Quote from: J N Winkler on November 29, 2012, 12:50:46 PM
There are also some aspects of forum governance which are far from transparent.  For example, it is widely known that this forum has an equivalent of the SABRE Committee board, where difficult problems of moderation and member behavior are discussed in confidence, but nobody seems to know how the membership of this committee is formed.  (In SABRE this information is available to all members since SABRE Committee is encoded as a membership category on our phpBB board.)  And as far as I know, the only two ways to figure out who is a moderator on this forum is to read the moderator listings for individual boards or to look for a "Moderator" or "Global Moderator" tag in the profile information to the left of a given member's posts.  This means that when a person with moderator authority, such as Steve, chooses not to be identified as a board moderator and not to wear a "Moderator" tag, people don't know he or she is actually a moderator unless they are reminded by someone in the know.  In SABRE moderators are clearly distinguished by the color in which their screen names appear, by an office-held tag immediately underneath, and by being listed on a management page (http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/society/management.shtml) which is reached by an easy bread-crumb trail from the main page.

Simple: the staff board is viewable to all moderators (local or global) and admins. As for how to tell who is and who is not a moderator, Steve is the only one of us (to my knowledge) who has a custom 'position'. Though, protip: The stars below a person's name indicate their 'position'. Red = staff, blue = regular member, green = DOT employee.

Quote from: J N Winkler on November 29, 2012, 12:50:46 PM
And as far as I know, the only two ways to figure out who is a moderator on this forum is to read the moderator listings for individual boards or to look for a "Moderator" or "Global Moderator" tag in the profile information to the left of a given member's posts.  This means that when a person with moderator authority, such as Steve, chooses not to be identified as a board moderator and not to wear a "Moderator" tag, people don't know he or she is actually a moderator unless they are reminded by someone in the know.  In SABRE moderators are clearly distinguished by the color in which their screen names appear, by an office-held tag immediately underneath, and by being listed on a management page (http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/society/management.shtml) which is reached by an easy bread-crumb trail from the main page.

There is one other way to find out who has mod power.  When you look at the left, look at the colored stars.  All Mods/Admins have red stars ((https://www.aaroads.com/forum/Themes/Button_Copy/images/staradmin.gif)).  The more stars, the higher power they have to do stuff here at the forums (like have access to the forum SMF source files.)

This place isn't moderated enough in my opinion.

Quote from: realjd on November 29, 2012, 02:06:36 PM

Quote from: NE2 on November 29, 2012, 05:49:11 AM
Whatever you call it, the important thing is to keep in mind the difference between those here for geeky reasons and those here for political reasons.

Are you talking R vs D politics or nerd-grudges within the roadgeek community? I'm here to satiate my nerdy interest in roads but, not being active in the greater roadgeek community, I have no idea if it's cliquish or not.

I'm talking those like CP and Beltway who primarily discuss the politics of road-building.

Quote from: NE2 on November 29, 2012, 05:24:55 PM

Quote from: realjd on November 29, 2012, 02:06:36 PM

Quote from: NE2 on November 29, 2012, 05:49:11 AM
Whatever you call it, the important thing is to keep in mind the difference between those here for geeky reasons and those here for political reasons.

Are you talking R vs D politics or nerd-grudges within the roadgeek community? I'm here to satiate my nerdy interest in roads but, not being active in the greater roadgeek community, I have no idea if it's cliquish or not.

I'm talking those like CP and Beltway who primarily discuss the politics of road-building.

As someone who sees some of the inner workings of this every day, it's one of the more fascinating aspects of the process. And one of the most frustrating, too, I might add.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 02:24:37 PM
Simple: the staff board is viewable to all moderators (local or global) and admins. As for how to tell who is and who is not a moderator, Steve is the only one of us (to my knowledge) who has a custom 'position'. Though, protip: The stars below a person's name indicate their 'position'. Red = staff, blue = regular member, green = DOT employee.

I still think it would be a really good idea if everyone was known to everyone else, especially the moderators, by their real names. I know who Steve is, and US 71, and rickmastfan (How many people know who Rick Mast is?), and a few others, but I have no idea who you are.

Quote from: US71 on November 28, 2012, 09:53:26 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Comrade:
I will ask that you NOT lump us all together as you appear to be doing.  :eyebrow:

Oh, and it's "Road Scholar", thank you very much.  :spin:

I have no problems with the term "roadgeek." There is actually a "Roads Scholar" program offered by the University of Kentucky's Kentucky Transportation Center. KYTC's equipment operators and local government road crew workers and officials can take the course. Geek, scholar, enthusiast, hobbyist, I"ll answer to any and all of them. With one exception...

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 28, 2012, 10:10:28 PM

Quote from: US71 on November 28, 2012, 09:53:26 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Comrade:
I will ask that you NOT lump us all together as you appear to be doing.  :eyebrow:

Oh, and it's "Road Scholar", thank you very much.  :spin:

If "bugo" isn't a roadgeek and isn't a Road Scholar, does that make him a viatologist?   :hmmm:

Post of the day!

At the risk of pulling back the curtain too far, Moderation is a regular topic on the Moderator Board (got to be a better way to say that). Who has gone too far, who deserves another chance, etc. And we don't always agree, so anyone who thinks we're lockstep is wrong.  So moderation is a sticky situation.

On some of the SCA boards I moderate, one person will complain I'm too lenient while another complains I'm too restrictive on the same topic. Sometimes, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.  :banghead:

Quote from: hbelkins on November 29, 2012, 07:35:05 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 02:24:37 PM
Simple: the staff board is viewable to all moderators (local or global) and admins. As for how to tell who is and who is not a moderator, Steve is the only one of us (to my knowledge) who has a custom 'position'. Though, protip: The stars below a person's name indicate their 'position'. Red = staff, blue = regular member, green = DOT employee.

I still think it would be a really good idea if everyone was known to everyone else, especially the moderators, by their real names. I know who Steve is, and US 71, and rickmastfan (How many people know who Rick Mast is?), and a few others, but I have no idea who you are.

Probably because while I've been on this forum since its inception, I was never active in the roadgeek community until then, and don't currently have the ability to travel to road meets so I have yet to attend one. I've only met a handful of you in person.
I try to be open about myself though, and do prefer being addressed by my real name (Connor - my Facebook page is linked to my profile so I figure anyone who wants to actually find out my name and what I look like can click on that) rather than deathtopumpkins.

You know this got me thinking... you bring up a good point. Maybe we should consider a sticky post in the Welcome board or something listing who the moderators are with maybe a quick blurb.

I think the moderation on here is just fine the way it is.  Moderators take an active interest in keeping the forums on topic, yet also reveal themselves as human beings with the ability to cut a guy some slack.

If they were to take even earlier and more decisive actions to prevent thread drift, personal attacks, abusive language, and the like, then I would simply take that as part of their job to keep the forum tidy and friendly.  If they moderated much less than they do now, then squabbles would get more out of hand than they do now, and I would likely lose interest in reading all the blather (as, I assume, others would lose interest in reading my blather).

The only moderation I question the slightest bit is the wholesale deletion of posts when things get heated.  I understand that doing so prevents people from replying and continuing the war, but I have to think there's a less intrusive way of doing so.

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 12:50:46 PM
AARoads politburo combined all the posts into a single post, which removed all of its meaning

How, exactly, did combining your posts, without otherwise altering what you had typed, remove all of its meaning?

^That'd be nice.

As a FYI - maybe I can give an answer to the multiple replies being separated out. It's downright difficult or impossible to do combined replies if you are on a smartphone or a tablet - this forum package (SMF) and others just simply cannot handle it.

Just looking at the site on a desktop, the interface is very out-of-date but that's a reflection of SMF and not of AARoads. It's not simple, and when you are trying to use your fingers to pinch and zoom, and to try to embed anything, or bold text - it's just not a good situation. That said, it also makes it hard to do more than one reply in a post because that would require copying the contents of a reply, pasting it into a third-party text writing app, replying to another post and copying its contents, pasting it into a third party app, (repeat as many times) combining it all when you are done and then re-pasting it.

I just tried to do it with this thread via my iPad and gave up after 10 minutes of trying to do three joined replies. I won't even attempt with the iPhone.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 08:11:58 PM
Probably because while I've been on this forum since its inception, I was never active in the roadgeek community until then, and don't currently have the ability to travel to road meets so I have yet to attend one. I've only met a handful of you in person.
I try to be open about myself though, and do prefer being addressed by my real name (Connor - my Facebook page is linked to my profile so I figure anyone who wants to actually find out my name and what I look like can click on that) rather than deathtopumpkins.

You know this got me thinking... you bring up a good point. Maybe we should consider a sticky post in the Welcome board or something listing who the moderators are with maybe a quick blurb.

There's one person on this board -- won't mention who -- that I had interacted with for years on MTR, on Roadgeek and via exchanges of private email, and have actually met in person -- but I had no idea who he was until recently. Once I made the connection, it was easy to see that he was who he is.

Quote from: US71 on November 29, 2012, 07:54:04 PM
At the risk of pulling back the curtain too far, Moderation is a regular topic on the Moderator Board (got to be a better way to say that). Who has gone too far, who deserves another chance, etc. And we don't always agree, so anyone who thinks we're lockstep is wrong.  So moderation is a sticky situation.

On some of the SCA boards I moderate, one person will complain I'm too lenient while another complains I'm too restrictive on the same topic. Sometimes, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.  :banghead:

I grumble about it at times, but overall this group is an order of magnitude better forum than MTR on Usenet.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 08:11:58 PM
You know this got me thinking... you bring up a good point. Maybe we should consider a sticky post in the Welcome board or something listing who the moderators are with maybe a quick blurb.

I think there is a mod that can add a staff page to the site.  I'll have to double check the mods at SMF, but I'm pretty sure there is such a mod.

EDIT: Found it. (http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=348)  If Alex thinks this is a good idea, I'll go ahead and see what needs to be done to get it to work with the Button Copy theme.

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 29, 2012, 08:22:40 PM
As a FYI - maybe I can give an answer to the multiple replies being separated out. It's downright difficult or impossible to do combined replies if you are on a smartphone or a tablet - this forum package (SMF) and others just simply cannot handle it.

This is a very good point. I frequently browse (but rarely post on) the site on my phone, and even if you have a reply long enough that you have to scroll it becomes essentially impossible. I generally get around this by waiting to write a long post until I'm back on my actual computer, but if you were to post multiple times because you were doing it from your phone and it would be too difficult to multiquote, that would definitely be excusable, because it's a perfectly valid excuse.

The issue with the whole multiple post thing is where the line is drawn - making 9 consecutive posts from a computer just because you can is not acceptable, whereas making several consecutive ones from a phone because it's too cumbersome to combine them most likely is perfectly acceptable.

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 29, 2012, 10:15:52 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 08:11:58 PM
You know this got me thinking... you bring up a good point. Maybe we should consider a sticky post in the Welcome board or something listing who the moderators are with maybe a quick blurb.

I think there is a mod that can add a staff page to the site.  I'll have to double check the mods at SMF, but I'm pretty sure there is such a mod.

EDIT: Found it. (http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=348)  If Alex thinks this is a good idea, I'll go ahead and see what needs to be done to get it to work with the Button Copy theme.

Sweet. Now lets just see how long until he notices this post...  :)

Quote from: hbelkins on November 29, 2012, 07:35:05 PM
I still think it would be a really good idea if everyone was known to everyone else, especially the moderators, by their real names. I know who Steve is, and US 71, and rickmastfan (How many people know who Rick Mast is?), and a few others, but I have no idea who you are.

This is one aspect of this board which is unusual: we are a small, tight knit community, and many of us know each other in real life. Most forums do not typically go along with any real world interaction.

This certainly affects how this place is moderated, and the very fact that this thread is even permitted to exist is clear proof of that. How many forums do you know where the membership can freely and openly discuss site policy? Most sites operate on the philosophy "here's how it is, if you don't like it there's the door" and would not permit such discussion.

FWIW, it seems to me that most moderation is cosmetic (fixing broken quotes, etc.). You have the occasional heated discussion and the occasional troll that needs smiting, but we're good at playing nice, especially by internet standards.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 10:44:53 PM

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 29, 2012, 10:15:52 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on November 29, 2012, 08:11:58 PM
You know this got me thinking... you bring up a good point. Maybe we should consider a sticky post in the Welcome board or something listing who the moderators are with maybe a quick blurb.

I think there is a mod that can add a staff page to the site.  I'll have to double check the mods at SMF, but I'm pretty sure there is such a mod.

EDIT: Found it. (http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=348)  If Alex thinks this is a good idea, I'll go ahead and see what needs to be done to get it to work with the Button Copy theme.

Sweet. Now lets just see how long until he notices this post...  :)

Alex and I talked this over a little bit ago and that mod is now installed. ;)  To access it, either click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=staff), or click on the new tab up top titled "STAFF LIST". ;)

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 28, 2012, 05:46:40 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

You asked for opinions and people are giving them. If you don't like the opinions, then don't read the thread.

Rooty tooty, fresh and fruity.

If you want to see a forum with truly transparent moderation, go to http://www.tdpri.com/forum/index.php.  You wouldn't know it was even moderated if it weren't for "MODERATOR" by some posters' names.  Everyone gets along for the most part, and life goes on.  If this forum were run like tdpri.com, I would have no complaints.  Instead it's run more like a soviet.

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 28, 2012, 10:10:28 PM

Quote from: US71 on November 28, 2012, 09:53:26 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 05:30:04 PM
I thought you guys had more backbone than you do.  I guess that's why you are "roadgeeks" (and I'm not.)

Comrade:
I will ask that you NOT lump us all together as you appear to be doing.  :eyebrow:

Oh, and it's "Road Scholar", thank you very much.  :spin:

If "bugo" isn't a roadgeek and isn't a Road Scholar, does that make him a viatologist?   :hmmm:

I'd much rather be a "viatologist" than a "roadgeek." 

/me waits for SuperModScott or SuperModSteve to combine my 3 totally unrelated posts.  Rooty tooty, fresh and fruity.

I've always had an attitude about forums that if I don't like the way they're run, I quit reading them. 

I don't think it's too moderated. I can't think of any purple I've seen that wasn't used right.

Off-topic: on the staff list, Steve is also listed under State Property. :-D

Just wanted to chime in as an irregular poster but a very regular reader.

Sometimes, I think the mods are a little too quick to shut down discussions because they either go off topic or have the mere mention of politics/religion. I do visit other boards where the mods generally lay back and let discussions pan out even if they go way out except in the cases of all-out flame wars or spammers. If there's a good off-topic discussion going on, I would just either let it continue in its current thread or move the posts to the Off Topic Board.

But where I do agree greatly with them is when there's a major formatting error in someone's post such that it's harder to read; if they just want to fix a quote tag, I don't see why you should get your panties in a bunch. And about the OP himself, you're being quite a dick about the multiple postings in a row. The fact that you're egging them on to merge your posts and getting ever so closer to proving Godwin's Law is really putting me off as a reader of your posts and am less likely to consider your posts/thoughts in the future. And that's coming from someone who's a big partisan (not saying which way here) and cringes on some of the posts here.

Matte: Did you read my comment (last page) about mobile/tablet replies? It makes it near impossible to impossible to do combined replies. Not sure if the OP is using a mobile/tablet for his replying, but that could provide one answer.

Quote from: Mr. Matté on November 30, 2012, 08:44:45 AM
.... And about the OP himself, you're being quite a dick about the multiple postings in a row. The fact that you're egging them on to merge your posts and getting ever so closer to proving Godwin's Law is really putting me off as a reader of your posts and am less likely to consider your posts/thoughts in the future. And that's coming from someone who's a big partisan (not saying which way here) and cringes on some of the posts here.

On just about every other forum I've visited, if a poster gave the moderators the finger the way the OP in this thread is doing, he'd get at least a suspension, if not a banning. Of course the downside of the suspension is that then he just comes back and says, "See, I told you so," but in that case it just provides a reason for making the suspension permanent.

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 30, 2012, 09:20:10 AM
Matte: Did you read my comment (last page) about mobile/tablet replies? It makes it near impossible to impossible to do combined replies. Not sure if the OP is using a mobile/tablet for his replying, but that could provide one answer.

It's definitely harder to edit replies on a mobile device, but if that were his situation, a reasonable person would just say that instead of acting like a prick about the issue and daring the moderators to suspend him.

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 03:44:04 AM
I'd much rather be a "viatologist" than a "roadgeek." 

....

I have a feeling you have no idea about the origins of "viatologist."

True, @1995hoo. I don't think it was as much as a dare as a question stemming around that. I know on some places that I post at, if its from a mobile/tablet and it's not formatted for that, then I'll post a little script at the bottom: "This reply may be from a mobile device, and replies may not be properly formatted."

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 30, 2012, 09:31:13 AM
True, @1995hoo. I don't think it was as much as a dare as a question stemming around that. I know on some places that I post at, if its from a mobile/tablet and it's not formatted for that, then I'll post a little script at the bottom: "This reply may be from a mobile device, and replies may not be properly formatted."

I know several people who do something similar with e-mail and set their phones' autosignatures to say something like, "Sent via iPhone. Please excuse minor typos." (I think just about everyone who has a so-called smartphone has fallen prey to the overzealous autocorrect at some point.)

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 09:22:30 AM
I have a feeling you have no idea about the origins of "viatologist."

Jeremy knows, trust me. He's an old-timer from MTR.

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 09:44:45 AM
I know several people who do something similar with e-mail and set their phones' autosignatures to say something like, "Sent via iPhone. Please excuse minor typos." (I think just about everyone who has a so-called smartphone has fallen prey to the overzealous autocorrect at some point.)

I keep autocorrect turned off on all my devices.

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 30, 2012, 02:56:36 AM
Alex and I talked this over a little bit ago and that mod is now installed. ;)  To access it, either click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=staff), or click on the new tab up top titled "STAFF LIST". ;)

"An error has occurred. You cannot access the staff list."

:ded:

Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2012, 10:26:09 AM
....

I keep autocorrect turned off on all my devices.

Did you do that from the start or did you change the setting because you found it annoying? Just curious.

(Funny thing is that once I got used to it on my phone I began to find it annoying that the software on my PC doesn't have the same capability unless I set it up....sure, it corrects some things, but it varies from application to application and most of them don't necessarily do things such as inserting apostrophes in contractions and the like.)

Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2012, 10:28:17 AM

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 30, 2012, 02:56:36 AM
Alex and I talked this over a little bit ago and that mod is now installed. ;)  To access it, either click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=staff), or click on the new tab up top titled "STAFF LIST". ;)

"An error has occurred. You cannot access the staff list."

:ded:

It worked when I clicked it after posting the original portion of this reply and then seeing your comment.

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 30, 2012, 09:20:10 AM
Matte: Did you read my comment (last page) about mobile/tablet replies? It makes it near impossible to impossible to do combined replies. Not sure if the OP is using a mobile/tablet for his replying, but that could provide one answer.

Unless you simply don't own a desktop or laptop, what on this board could possibly be so important that you would need to rattle off 3 or more consecutive posts?

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 29, 2012, 08:22:40 PM
^That'd be nice.

As a FYI - maybe I can give an answer to the multiple replies being separated out. It's downright difficult or impossible to do combined replies if you are on a smartphone or a tablet - this forum package (SMF) and others just simply cannot handle it.

Just looking at the site on a desktop, the interface is very out-of-date but that's a reflection of SMF and not of AARoads. It's not simple, and when you are trying to use your fingers to pinch and zoom, and to try to embed anything, or bold text - it's just not a good situation. That said, it also makes it hard to do more than one reply in a post because that would require copying the contents of a reply, pasting it into a third-party text writing app, replying to another post and copying its contents, pasting it into a third party app, (repeat as many times) combining it all when you are done and then re-pasting it.

I just tried to do it with this thread via my iPad and gave up after 10 minutes of trying to do three joined replies. I won't even attempt with the iPhone.

If you click the "Reply" tab, at the bottom of the page, rather than posting in the Quick Reply box, you are taken to a page with a reply box, underneath which are listed the most recent posts in reverse order. You can click "Insert Quote" in the header of one of these posts, and it inserts it with quote syntax into the box, no copy and paste needed.

Does this not work on the iPad?

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 10:29:09 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2012, 10:26:09 AM
....

I keep autocorrect turned off on all my devices.

Did you do that from the start or did you change the setting because you found it annoying? Just curious.

The latter.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2012, 10:28:17 AM

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on November 30, 2012, 02:56:36 AM
Alex and I talked this over a little bit ago and that mod is now installed. ;)  To access it, either click here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=staff), or click on the new tab up top titled "STAFF LIST". ;)

"An error has occurred. You cannot access the staff list."

:ded:

It worked when I clicked it after posting the original portion of this reply and then seeing your comment.
[/quote]

I don't even have the aforementioned tab listed 'up top.'  :ded: :ded:

On my browser (Firefox), the "tab list" shows up below where it has my avatar and my total time logged in and the admonition "News: Avoid mangled quotes! Some handy tips." Underneath that there's sort of a long tab in an inverted position (think a manila file folder turned upside-down) with a number of options. "Staff list" is fourth from the right. I didn't click there, though; when I said "it worked when I clicked it," I was referring to the word "here" in the prior comment by "rickmastfan67."

Edited to add: After posting the above paragraph I tried clicking on "Staff list" up there and it worked fine.

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 30, 2012, 10:34:29 AM

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on November 29, 2012, 08:22:40 PM
^That'd be nice.

As a FYI - maybe I can give an answer to the multiple replies being separated out. It's downright difficult or impossible to do combined replies if you are on a smartphone or a tablet - this forum package (SMF) and others just simply cannot handle it.

Just looking at the site on a desktop, the interface is very out-of-date but that's a reflection of SMF and not of AARoads. It's not simple, and when you are trying to use your fingers to pinch and zoom, and to try to embed anything, or bold text - it's just not a good situation. That said, it also makes it hard to do more than one reply in a post because that would require copying the contents of a reply, pasting it into a third-party text writing app, replying to another post and copying its contents, pasting it into a third party app, (repeat as many times) combining it all when you are done and then re-pasting it.

I just tried to do it with this thread via my iPad and gave up after 10 minutes of trying to do three joined replies. I won't even attempt with the iPhone.

If you click the "Reply" tab, at the bottom of the page, rather than posting in the Quick Reply box, you are taken to a page with a reply box, underneath which are listed the most recent posts in reverse order. You can click "Insert Quote" in the header of one of these posts, and it inserts it with quote syntax into the box, no copy and paste needed.

Does this not work on the iPad?

I just tried it - it works fine on my iPad. I didn't even know there was a non-quick reply button. Thanks!

I have Home, Help, Search, Profile, My Messages, Calendar, Members, Chat, Logout in my list. Running Chrome Version 23.0.1271.91 on a MacBook Pro running OS 10.6.8.

Re:  multiple posts being difficult on a mobile device....
So wait until you get to a PC.  Or if that's not convenient for you, go ahead and make seven posts in a row, then add a tag that you would appreciate a post merge by a moderator.  No biggie.

Re:  why merge posts at all?
Again, bugo, how do post merges detract from the meaning of your posts?  Having your username in between each post breaks them up no more than a horizontal line or even just the start of a new quote.  I think everyone understands that, when you're finished replying to a quoted text, they should expect you to change topics with the next quotation.

Bugo is acting like a Repub who can't deal with Romney losing.

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 09:22:30 AM
I have a feeling you have no idea about the origins of "viatologist."

I have a feeling I've been on MTR since 1998.

SPUI is acting like Tom From Ohio, minus the sharp humor and biting satire.

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 02:30:37 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 09:22:30 AM
I have a feeling you have no idea about the origins of "viatologist."

I have a feeling I've been on MTR since 1998.

Good for you. I don't post there and I visit infrequently, so I have no idea of your habits. But your generally negative attitude and your lack of objection to "viatologist" made me suspect you were unfamiliar with the idiot who generally uses that term.

Now, why don't you try answering the question "kphoger" asked? Or did you instead want to start a thread in which you purport to solicit opinions so that you can just disagree with those opinions (which is pretty much the standard definition of "trolling")?

Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2012, 01:20:43 PM
I have Home, Help, Search, Profile, My Messages, Calendar, Members, Chat, Logout in my list. Running Chrome Version 23.0.1271.91 on a MacBook Pro running OS 10.6.8.

I don't know if you can do this on a Mac, but perhaps it would fix it if you do what I've heard referred to as a "hard refresh" (in Firefox I hit "Ctrl-F5" or else hold down "Ctrl" while clicking "Refresh") to force it to fetch the full page from the server instead of using cached data?

Quote from: kphoger on November 30, 2012, 01:25:26 PM
Re:  multiple posts being difficult on a mobile device....
So wait until you get to a PC.  Or if that's not convenient for you,

That is not a good answer. A website, at least in 2012, should at least cater to all types of popular devices via a responsive template. A responsive site is one that, based on breakpoints set within the CSS and a very simple Javascript file, will dynamically shift the page so that the content is readable whether it is on a television or on a mobile device. There are times that I am on the road for a week at a time and my only access is on an iPhone. Not that I check AARoads, but I log into various other sites to file reports that are mobile friendly.

But as I stated earlier, it's not really a problem specifically with AARoads. It's SMF 2, and/or templates.

But in this day and age, you can't expect people to just wait until they "get home" to get to a "computer" - when a considerable amount of online traffic is now from tablets and mobile devices. Don't be naive.

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 02:42:03 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 02:30:37 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 09:22:30 AM
I have a feeling you have no idea about the origins of "viatologist."

I have a feeling I've been on MTR since 1998.

Good for you. I don't post there and I visit infrequently, so I have no idea of your habits. But your generally negative attitude and your lack of objection to "viatologist" made me suspect you were unfamiliar with the idiot who generally uses that term.

I know where the term comes from.  In fact, the offender who came up with that term is residing in my killfile.  I just hate, hate, HATE the term "roadgeek."  I'm not a geek.  The only things I "geek out" about are antique cars and guitars/music.  Roads are a secondary hobby for me.  When I was in school in the '80s-early '90s, "geek" was a pejorative.  It is still a negative term to me.  "Viatologist" is silly but it's less offensive than "roadgeek."  I use the term "roadguy" or "road enthusiast."  It's unfortunate that "roadgeek" has become the most common term for a road enthusiast.

Quote
Now, why don't you try answering the question "kphoger" asked? Or did you instead want to start a thread in which you purport to solicit opinions so that you can just disagree with those opinions (which is pretty much the standard definition of "trolling")?

If I wanted to troll, you would know it.  Remember, I'm the guy who brought you Tom From Ohio and the All-Caps Troll.  I started this thread because I thought some of you had balls (and some of you do) and thought the forum was too moderated.  It ties in with my "anal road enthusiast" thread.  Road enthusiasts tend to be too anal about everything.  C'mon, it's a hobby, and can be fun, but some road enthusiasts make it a chore.  Like I said, I'm on many forums, and on every one but this one the moderators are invisible.  I've made several posts in a row and never had them merged.  Go to http://www.strat-talk.com and notice the difference.  I'm outspoken there as I am here and I've never had one single problem with the moderators.  I think it's a power trip thing.  I was once a moderator here and I never went on power trips.  I was an invisible moderator.  Too bad the rest of the mods aren't like me.

Nice little rant, but you still didn't answer the question "kphoger" posed.

It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

My only question is if you'll stay away this time, unlike the last little temper tantrum you had.

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 30, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

....

Indeed, especially after the latest thread he posted about Wikipedia. It kind of puts a moderator in a tough place because you either give him the satisfaction of getting what he wants or you antagonize everyone else.

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 04:47:24 PM

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 30, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

....

Indeed, especially after the latest thread he posted about Wikipedia. It kind of puts a moderator in a tough place because you either give him the satisfaction of getting what he wants or you antagonize everyone else.

You can't handle criticism very well, can you?

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 04:55:26 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 04:47:24 PM

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 30, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

....

Indeed, especially after the latest thread he posted about Wikipedia. It kind of puts a moderator in a tough place because you either give him the satisfaction of getting what he wants or you antagonize everyone else.

You can't handle criticism very well, can you?

You can't answer the question that was asked of you, can you?

I guess you get the last word because I need to go pick up my wife at the Metrorail stop. Enjoy thinking you scared me off somehow.

Quote from: Roadsguy on November 30, 2012, 08:17:06 AM
I don't think it's too moderated. I can't think of any purple I've seen that wasn't used right.

Off-topic: on the staff list, Steve is also listed under State Property. :-D

That's because that's what Steve likes his group to be called. lol.  I added his group there to let people know that it's higher than a normal global mod.

Quote from: hbelkins on November 30, 2012, 01:20:43 PM
I have Home, Help, Search, Profile, My Messages, Calendar, Members, Chat, Logout in my list. Running Chrome Version 23.0.1271.91 on a MacBook Pro running OS 10.6.8.

I'll look into this bug HB.  I'm thinking it has something to do with your DOT group, but I'll have to double check on it and get back to ya. ;)
EDIT: HB, found, and fixed.  The DOT Employee group needed to have the permission added to it.  I've fixed it and you should now be seeing it without any problems. ;)  Thank you for bringing it to my attention. ;)

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 04:58:55 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 04:55:26 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 04:47:24 PM

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 30, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

....

Indeed, especially after the latest thread he posted about Wikipedia. It kind of puts a moderator in a tough place because you either give him the satisfaction of getting what he wants or you antagonize everyone else.

You can't handle criticism very well, can you?

You can't answer the question that was asked of you, can you?

I guess you get the last word because I need to go pick up my wife at the Metrorail stop. Enjoy thinking you scared me off somehow.

Which question was that?

I don't think I scared you off.  Hell, I don't even know who you are.  I've never noticed your posts until you started flaming me (and you flaming me is just as bad as me complaining, if not worse.  Maybe you should be banned.)

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 29, 2012, 02:32:40 PM
This place isn't moderated enough in my opinion.

And you've let us know that more than sufficiently. And we'd have already banned you for 24 hours if we were as strict as you suggest.
Yes, we're letting this thread run basically unmoderated. Sometimes it's healthy to have an airing of grievances. And with Festivus coming up, no better time!

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 30, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

My only question is if you'll stay away this time, unlike the last little temper tantrum you had.

Stop. Stop your personal arguing on this forum. Talk to him offline like a man, or we'll ban you like you're asking for as "strict" moderators.

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 02:32:02 PM
SPUI is acting like Tom From Ohio, minus the sharp humor and biting satire.

(Third unmerged post in a row - take THAT guidelines!) Unlike TFO, SPUI's humor and biting satire are actually part of who he is, not any attempt to troll. And that's why he's an awesome person. (And I didn't type a racial slur to make that phrase appear, either!)

You don't think there is at least a little TFO in me?  You must not know me very well.

Quote from: US71 on November 29, 2012, 07:54:04 PM
At the risk of pulling back the curtain too far, Moderation is a regular topic on the Moderator Board (got to be a better way to say that). Who has gone too far, who deserves another chance, etc. And we don't always agree, so anyone who thinks we're lockstep is wrong.  So moderation is a sticky situation.

I hope this isn't a smuggled video from one of the secret moderator meetings; it would certainly explain the sticky situation part:


What's even more shocking is the final subtitle: it ties together the threads ... and explains ... EVERYTHING!:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrNxdw.jpg&hash=c2a0b510daaa6a121546d12f3906ac3bd2d3f037)

If you ever hear someone refer to "putting the mod hat on", that is the type of hat being referred to.

Quote from: Steve on November 30, 2012, 06:00:49 PM

Quote from: InterstateNG on November 30, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
It's quite obvious that he's on a mission to get banned.

My only question is if you'll stay away this time, unlike the last little temper tantrum you had.

Stop. Stop your personal arguing on this forum. Talk to him offline like a man, or we'll ban you like you're asking for as "strict" moderators.

Go ahead.  It makes zero difference to me one way or the other.

And I'm wrong.  This place shouldn't be more strict, because it's quite obvious you guys don't know what you're doing.

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 05:07:52 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 04:58:55 PM
You can't answer the question that was asked of you, can you?

Which question was that?

I assume he was referring to this:

Quote from: kphoger on November 29, 2012, 08:18:06 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 28, 2012, 12:50:46 PM
AARoads politburo combined all the posts into a single post, which removed all of its meaning

How, exactly, did combining your posts, without otherwise altering what you had typed, remove all of its meaning?

Quote from: kphoger on November 30, 2012, 01:25:26 PM
Re:  why merge posts at all?
Again, bugo, how do post merges detract from the meaning of your posts?  Having your username in between each post breaks them up no more than a horizontal line or even just the start of a new quote.  I think everyone understands that, when you're finished replying to a quoted text, they should expect you to change topics with the next quotation.

Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 02:42:03 PM

Quote from: bugo on November 30, 2012, 02:30:37 PM* * *

Now, why don't you try answering the question "kphoger" asked?

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I feel like the forum is moderated enough. It let's the comments and content stay formal enough, while allowing everyone to express themselves.

Allowing everyone to express themselves?  Maybe if you say something the mods agree with.  Say anything they disagree with and your post gets deleted.

Quote from: bugo on December 01, 2012, 03:15:11 PM
Allowing everyone to express themselves?  Maybe if you say something the mods agree with.  Say anything they disagree with and your post gets deleted.

I disagree.

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I'm confused, are you seriously questioning the fact that I locked a thread after the following?:
"Then fucking leave."
"Make me, bellend."
"I couldn't care less, bitch. What are you, 12 years old?"

:hmmm:

I'll say this. Whenever I see posts that have been merged, I think someone must have way too much time on his hands.

Quote from: flowmotion on December 01, 2012, 04:52:13 PM
I'll say this. Whenever I see posts that have been merged, I think someone must have way too much time on his hands.

I read the forum. When I see consecutive posts from the same poster that are related, I hit merge. It's quick and barely adds any time to my daily reading.

Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2012, 03:26:46 PM

Quote from: bugo on December 01, 2012, 03:15:11 PM
Allowing everyone to express themselves?  Maybe if you say something the mods agree with.  Say anything they disagree with and your post gets deleted.

I disagree.

US 412 totally kicks ass.

I expect this post to be deleted pronto.

Quote from: bugo on December 01, 2012, 05:31:54 PM

Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2012, 03:26:46 PM

Quote from: bugo on December 01, 2012, 03:15:11 PM
Allowing everyone to express themselves?  Maybe if you say something the mods agree with.  Say anything they disagree with and your post gets deleted.

I disagree.

US 412 totally kicks ass.

I expect this post to be deleted pronto.

You misspelled "smells like"

I think we do not want to end up like facebook here.  The thing is some people do not even have a fuse as they have the tendency to go off as the match is being struck.  One person here went off on me once cause I told another Bud Shuster joke that so many others on this forum have been telling as he is public enemy number one with his legislated Intastate Interstate 99.  I say intrastate as not many miles of it are in New York at this time, for those who are wondering.  Anyway, we all know why we hate Buddy Shyster, but the point is my post is called a "fine necro" just for saying jokingly that another road should be named after him.

Some people take things over the line here and it should not be.  I doubt we go off on people at local bars when we have the same discussion.  I meet many I disagree with politically and morally while I am about, but we end up being better friends spite our differences.  I am sure that many of you love to hate those you know in person who do not believe the same way as you!  So why is it different here?

To me 'like facebook' suggests inane conversations full of memes that were old on m.t.r.

Such as I-99.

Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2012, 06:17:35 PM
I think we do not want to end up like facebook here.  The thing is some people do not even have a fuse as they have the tendency to go off as the match is being struck.  One person here went off on me once cause I told another Bud Shuster joke that so many others on this forum have been telling as he is public enemy number one with his legislated Intastate Interstate 99.  I say intrastate as not many miles of it are in New York at this time, for those who are wondering.  Anyway, we all know why we hate Buddy Shyster, but the point is my post is called a "fine necro" just for saying jokingly that another road should be named after him.

Your post was a "necro", a word you clearly do not understand. That means you posted in a topic that was months old. That's your fault.

Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2012, 06:17:35 PM
I think we do not want to end up like facebook here.  The thing is some people do not even have a fuse as they have the tendency to go off as the match is being struck.  One person here went off on me once cause I told another Bud Shuster joke that so many others on this forum have been telling as he is public enemy number one with his legislated Intastate Interstate 99.  I say intrastate as not many miles of it are in New York at this time, for those who are wondering.  Anyway, we all know why we hate Buddy Shyster, but the point is my post is called a "fine necro" just for saying jokingly that another road should be named after him.

A "necro" or "necropost" is when someone posts in a "dead" thread. Usually we discourage it unless there's a good reason to do so (a good example would be like a thread about a proposed highway that dies off when there is no action for a while, and then it is given approval to begin construction). Whoever was upset was likely not angry because of the actual content of your post, but rather, that you bumped an old thread to the top for a trivial reason.

---

Another thing, regarding post merges: As Steve pointed out, there is a button that appears to moderators whenever two posts are merged that says "Merge Posts", with a little MUTCD merge icon. You click it and it merges the posts automatically, complete with explanatory purple text. 

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 01, 2012, 04:14:50 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I'm confused, are you seriously questioning the fact that I locked a thread after the following?:
"Then fucking leave."
"Make me, bellend."
"I couldn't care less, bitch. What are you, 12 years old?"

:hmmm:

I think that's where some post deletions would have been in order.

Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2012, 06:00:52 PM

Quote from: bugo on December 01, 2012, 05:31:54 PM

Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2012, 03:26:46 PM

Quote from: bugo on December 01, 2012, 03:15:11 PM
Allowing everyone to express themselves?  Maybe if you say something the mods agree with.  Say anything they disagree with and your post gets deleted.

I disagree.

US 412 totally kicks ass.

I expect this post to be deleted pronto.

You misspelled "smells like"

What about 400 and 425? Or I-238? Or maybe I-99?

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 08:04:01 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 01, 2012, 04:14:50 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I'm confused, are you seriously questioning the fact that I locked a thread after the following?:
"Then fucking leave."
"Make me, bellend."
"I couldn't care less, bitch. What are you, 12 years old?"

:hmmm:

I think that's where some post deletions would have been in order.

Ah, I thought you were saying I shouldn't have done anything.
I'd rather just leave the posts but lock the thread, to make it an example of what will get a thread locked.

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 08:04:01 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 01, 2012, 04:14:50 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I'm confused, are you seriously questioning the fact that I locked a thread after the following?:
"Then fucking leave."
"Make me, bellend."
"I couldn't care less, bitch. What are you, 12 years old?"

:hmmm:

I think that's where some post deletions would have been in order.

I firmly believe that deleting posts (or moving them to a hidden board) and editing of posts to remove text (not just to repair quote errors and other purely syntactical problems) should be done only under extreme circumstances, e.g. when the poster has admitted to criminal conduct that is routinely punishable with imprisonment.  Deletions just invite censorship rows from the membership at large, and remove an audit trail whereby other moderators can see that the action taken has been fair.

In this case I would have suspended (not banned) the two members involved for a short period of time, say five days, and temporarily locked the thread for forty-eight hours.

Quote from: J N Winkler on December 01, 2012, 08:32:27 PM
I firmly believe that deleting posts (or moving them to a hidden board) and editing of posts to remove text (not just to repair quote errors and other purely syntactical problems) should be done only under extreme circumstances, e.g. when the poster has admitted to criminal conduct that is routinely punishable with imprisonment.  Deletions just invite censorship rows from the membership at large, and remove an audit trail whereby other moderators can see that the action taken has been fair.

In this case I would have suspended (not banned) the two members involved for a short period of time, say five days, and temporarily locked the thread for forty-eight hours.

There have been posts deleted before.

Censorship is a misunderstood term, as is "First Amendment." There is no First Amendment right to post here.

Quote from: J N Winkler on December 01, 2012, 08:32:27 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 08:04:01 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 01, 2012, 04:14:50 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I'm confused, are you seriously questioning the fact that I locked a thread after the following?:
"Then fucking leave."
"Make me, bellend."
"I couldn't care less, bitch. What are you, 12 years old?"

:hmmm:

I think that's where some post deletions would have been in order.

I firmly believe that deleting posts (or moving them to a hidden board) and editing of posts to remove text (not just to repair quote errors and other purely syntactical problems) should be done only under extreme circumstances, e.g. when the poster has admitted to criminal conduct that is routinely punishable with imprisonment.  Deletions just invite censorship rows from the membership at large, and remove an audit trail whereby other moderators can see that the action taken has been fair.

Which is why we rarely ever outright delete posts. They almost always are merely moved to an archive so that the rest of the staff can see them and restore them if they disagreed with the decision.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 01, 2012, 09:14:44 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on December 01, 2012, 08:32:27 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 08:04:01 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 01, 2012, 04:14:50 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8172.msg187952#msg187952

An argument for the prosecution or for the defense?

I'm confused, are you seriously questioning the fact that I locked a thread after the following?:
"Then fucking leave."
"Make me, bellend."
"I couldn't care less, bitch. What are you, 12 years old?"

:hmmm:

I think that's where some post deletions would have been in order.

I firmly believe that deleting posts (or moving them to a hidden board) and editing of posts to remove text (not just to repair quote errors and other purely syntactical problems) should be done only under extreme circumstances, e.g. when the poster has admitted to criminal conduct that is routinely punishable with imprisonment.  Deletions just invite censorship rows from the membership at large, and remove an audit trail whereby other moderators can see that the action taken has been fair.

Which is why we rarely ever outright delete posts. They almost always are merely moved to an archive so that the rest of the staff can see them and restore them if they disagreed with the decision.

Building off of this, we generally as a rule try to avoid outright deleting posts unless there is obviously no redeemable value to them (something like "pfpfpfpfpfpfpfpfpf" would be deleted outright).

If we only need to remove part of a post, it can be pasted to a thread in the archive board made for that purpose, such that we can also restore it from there if necessary.

Also, I would like to be lame and point out that I really want to move this to the Welcome board, since that is where meta stuff goes, but somehow I think moderating on a thread about too much moderation would not be received all that well :P

Go for it, Nazelrod. I double dog dare you.

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 01, 2012, 09:19:19 PM
Also, I would like to be lame and point out that I really want to move this to the Welcome board, since that is where meta stuff goes, but somehow I think moderating on a thread about too much moderation would not be received all that well :P

I'll call you Nazirod if you do ;)

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 01, 2012, 07:03:50 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on December 01, 2012, 06:17:35 PM
I think we do not want to end up like facebook here.  The thing is some people do not even have a fuse as they have the tendency to go off as the match is being struck.  One person here went off on me once cause I told another Bud Shuster joke that so many others on this forum have been telling as he is public enemy number one with his legislated Intastate Interstate 99.  I say intrastate as not many miles of it are in New York at this time, for those who are wondering.  Anyway, we all know why we hate Buddy Shyster, but the point is my post is called a "fine necro" just for saying jokingly that another road should be named after him.

A "necro" or "necropost" is when someone posts in a "dead" thread. Usually we discourage it unless there's a good reason to do so (a good example would be like a thread about a proposed highway that dies off when there is no action for a while, and then it is given approval to begin construction). Whoever was upset was likely not angry because of the actual content of your post, but rather, that you bumped an old thread to the top for a trivial reason.

---

Another thing, regarding post merges: As Steve pointed out, there is a button that appears to moderators whenever two posts are merged that says "Merge Posts", with a little MUTCD merge icon. You click it and it merges the posts automatically, complete with explanatory purple text. 

Telling a joke is not a necro post.  The Bud Shuster thing is ongoing and comes up quite frequently among users.  I may have brought back things that I should not have, but my main reason for stating short fuses are from what I witness from others.  I have seen other people call each other things or make gestures or argue for no apparent reason.  I could care less what others think of me.  Yes, I do make mistakes and yes I am still new to this thing here and YES I have learned a lot from here. 

It actually makes me feel good in a way that I am not singled out for personal reasons as I see other people go through things as  well.  You know, I have seen some people participate here and make the same mistakes I do and get offended right away and never post again.  Many people do want just to learn or participate in discussions.  Some of them they find interesting happened months before they joined and want to ad to what they missed.  Then you get some guy on here who insults them for posting old stuff and gets high blood pressure as a result of it.  That is insane!  I would not lose sleep if InterstateNG, lets say, wants to talk about the dead NJ 92 project if he brought up an old forum of one.  Now, even if you think it is old and that it is pointless, all right you can feel that way, but to get obsessed about it.  Come on there are better things to worry about than to wonder why some person you have not met is doing things you do not understand.  Even me, I once spent a whole day trying to figure out why some people wear shorts in 40 degree weather when they have a heavy Winter coat on at the same time.  Then I realized that there are more important things out there, like me being happy!

Some people get obsessed over the silliest things.  Not only here, but elsewhere as well.  Ignore someone if they make you itch.  For crying out loud is it worth it to think about someone you will never meet? 

By the way, the Dead Malls thread keeps making it back.  I guess if someone else is tired of hearing it again, it can be called a necro then?  I do not care if it does, just that some of you (to each other) are too much.   Matter of fact if I have something to say about one person's post in Dead Malls, I might join in as well.  I only lost it once with someone who insulted me, I got my post deleted  for the response I made in rebutal and I am not upset at all!  I am sorry I lost it, but sometimes you can only take it so much and us humans do break at times. 

Roadman65:

Definition of "necro": Bringing back an old post WITHOUT ADDING SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT.

Seriously. Dude. It's not hard. Even for you.

I wonder if it's fair to say that necroing once is OK, even if not terribly substantive, but if you necro multiple posts simultaneously then you're just being an ass

Quote from: corco on December 01, 2012, 10:11:50 PM
I wonder if it's fair to say that necroing once is OK, even if not terribly substantive, but if you necro multiple posts simultaneously then you're just being an ass

If you have something substantive to add, it's not necroing. You're not supposed to post if you have nothing to add, but we let a certain amount of dialogue go on before we really pronounce something off-topic.

Quote from: Steve on December 01, 2012, 10:09:17 PM
Roadman65:

Definition of "necro": Bringing back an old post WITHOUT ADDING SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT.

Seriously. Dude. It's not hard. Even for you.

I am not talking about myself bringing back old stuff, I am talking about name calling in general.  I see others call each other out and begin flame wars to each other.  I know when I am wrong and I move on.  I am not like some who get edgy over something so stupid.  So another man (not me, but others have necroed before too) and some get sarcastic  and loose sleep over it and make harsh remarks!  Some when they post are so affraid of posting that  they have to start off a topic, Please excuse me if I sound stupid or I do not know if this has been discussed or not, but I would like to know, etc. because someone like NG or NE will harrass them.  Heck Alex told me once off this forum that other users have done name calling. 

All right that some people bring up old topics and maybe you feel that the person is not contributing something positive to that thread, but that is up to interpretation as the one posting may feel he is contributing.  Now, true you have rules to follow, but maybe you should politely say to that person that he is doing wrong.  Not let a forward person like InterstateNG start talking like he knows that particular person (yes now I am on to me now), but I never heard the guy before.  I never even had a conversation with the guy and he is acting like I punched him in the stomach and getting mad not only at necroes but at a lot of other stuff I have said that were not bad
where others in this forum had friendly discussions with me about what pissed him off so badly.

From where I come from, if a person is so critical of others, that mostly means that individual has an inferiority complex with himself that he feels that he has to point out other people's mistakes.  Therefore I in away pity the individual and move on.  That is my point that NG is mad over a common joke I made, and therefore I will take it personally considering that he never speaks before about it.  Plus, he is not God and the owner of this forum and the fact he swears in a place that you do not know who is on the other end.  Not that who he tells to f/o could be 300 lbs and 7 feet tall, but a small child who logged on.   Then  what about him raising his blood pressure which is not good for him in general.

Personally, I think this discussion we are having is not worth it as I could be doing something better for myself right now.  All I wanted to do is point out that there need be no getting upset over something so silly not only for one bad user, but for all.  You guys keep missing the point and keep at it.

my 2 cents that will probably cost me 10 cents:

I like the way this forum is moderated.  I do not envy the job Steve, Alex, rickmast, US 71, etc. have moderating this forum.  I have learned quite a bit since joining a few years ago (necro, e.g.  I may be guilty of this, for which I apologize).  Y'all keep up the good work.

Quote from: roadman65 on December 02, 2012, 12:04:42 PM
:words:

I'm not sure which is larger, your Internet naivete, your persecution complex or your staggering lack of comprehension.

Keep my username out of your mouth.  And stop obsessing about something some jagoff on the internet said in a reply 6+ months ago.

Quote from: cjk374 on December 02, 2012, 01:08:06 PM
my 2 cents that will probably cost me 10 cents:

Hey, I'll keep paying you under the table as long as you'll keep saying nice things. ;)

Back to the original topic at hand though, this forum really isn't over-moderated.  Granted, some of the stuff is silly at times (certain post merges, correcting "IDiOT", etc), but overall, it's not over-moderated.  If it were, certain folks would've been banned long a go for their attitudes.

I once participated in a blog that was over-moderated.  The owner of the site would ban people due to vendettas or serious disagreements.  Needless to say, he wound up with a bunch of sycophants for members.  I got sick of the blog and just left.  I'd rather avoid that here and enjoy the variety of opinions.  It's much more fun.

Quote from: Brandon on December 02, 2012, 02:48:07 PM
Back to the original topic at hand though, this forum really isn't over-moderated.  Granted, some of the stuff is silly at times (certain post merges, correcting "IDiOT", etc), but overall, it's not over-moderated.  If it were, certain folks would've been banned long a go for their attitudes.

I would agree. Like all forums, this one has it's moments, but by-and-large, I think they do an okay job moderating here. There are things that they do that I may not totally agree with, but that's life. I do like that rules and edits do seem to be applied fairly uniformly. There are posters that you may consistently dislike what [little] they seem to add to a discussion, but that's why there's an "ignore" function.

I'm glad there are multiple moderators and that they actually seem to talk with each other. One forum that I only read on occasion anymore is run/moderated by one person with a very short fuse and the maturity of a 5 year-old (don't mean to insult any 5 year-olds). When a discussion turned in favor of an opinion he didn't like, he shut down the whole forums for a couple days. Not to mention, he was very difficult to try and have an adult conversation with.

Quote from: Brandon on December 02, 2012, 02:48:07 PM
Granted, some of the stuff is silly at times (saying "IDiOT", etc)

Fixed for you.

It might be silly, but it's FUNNY (and COOL.)  We could all benefit from a little humor.

It's about as funny as Charlie Brown falling on his ass.

IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

Quote from: InterstateNG on December 02, 2012, 01:22:46 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on December 02, 2012, 12:04:42 PM
:words:

I'm not sure which is larger, your Internet naivete, your persecution complex or your staggering lack of comprehension.

Keep my username out of your mouth.  And stop obsessing about something some jagoff on the internet said in a reply 6+ months ago.

Like I said, I am human I make mistakes and I learn from them.  I do not need someone else's  mistakes to make me feel superior.   

Quote from: NE2 on December 02, 2012, 06:20:12 PM
It's about as funny as Charlie Brown falling on his ass.

Admit it, you never tire of Lucy pulling the football.

---

Post Merge: December 02, 2012, 10:15:02 PM - only because this is the "forum too moderated" thread so it's funny

---

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

Hence it should be saved (as other DOT derisive names) for those cases where it truly applies.  better impact that way.

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

It wasn't funny the first time.  It was lame.

Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2012, 10:02:26 PM

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

It wasn't funny the first time.  It was lame.

You wouldn't know humor if it hit you in your fat ass.

Now THAT was funny.

</me> awaits for this post to be deleted because I said "ass."

If it were to be deleted, it would be because you're being intentionally insulting and confrontational, not because you said ass.

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 02, 2012, 10:42:22 PM
If it were to be deleted, it would be because you're being intentionally insulting and confrontational, not because you said ass.

Many posts in this thread seem to fit that definition. For example:

Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2012, 10:02:26 PM

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

It wasn't funny the first time.  It was lame.

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 01, 2012, 09:17:30 PM
Building off of this, we generally as a rule try to avoid outright deleting posts unless there is obviously no redeemable value to them (something like "pfpfpfpfpfpfpfpfpf" would be deleted outright).

<obligatory>
pfpfpfpfpfpfpfpfpf
</obligatory>

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

Just save "IDiOT" for times when IDOT actually does something idiotic. That's how you keep something like that fresh - you only use it when it's actually relevant.

Quote from: mukade on December 02, 2012, 10:52:04 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 02, 2012, 10:42:22 PM
If it were to be deleted, it would be because you're being intentionally insulting and confrontational, not because you said ass.

Many posts in this thread seem to fit that definition. For example:

Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2012, 10:02:26 PM

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

It wasn't funny the first time.  It was lame.

There's a rather important difference between "that joke is not funny; it is lame" and "You wouldn't know humor if it hit you in your fat ass."

There's definitely conflict in moderating between the staff.  I've asked certain moderators some things, and I get different answers. 

If it's not stated in the posting guidelines, please do not edit posts just because of a personal formatting pet peeves. 



I only go to 3 forums, but this is definitely one of the more tighter-bounded communities.  I feel like this community isn't really prone to too much spam, so certain moderators here are like cops in small safe towns -- camp out and get the speeders going 5 over. 

I have a feeling the reason you're posting loudly is because I asked you a dozen times to stop specifying odd fonts and colors in your posts. The only reason none of the other mods/admins had a problem with it is because they are all running Windows. I am not, and I don't have the fonts your posts were specifying, so that was making your posts show up in a 7-point serif font, which is not exactly helpful for me to be able to read them. Especially when they're also set to display in light gray on a light green background.

If we all stick to the default fonts the forum CSS can let the browser determine what the appropriate font and color combination is that will work for the reader. If you override that, the CSS can't do that. There are cases when using color is appropriate, like when it has some semantic meaning (example: listing a bunch of routes you have clinched, and having the ones you drove personally in green and the rest in red). "I want my posts to be in gray because I think that makes my posts special" is not an appropriate use of color.

Edited to add–To illustrate the above point, I took a screenshot of the post before editing:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKvu3g.png&hash=b6ddd9b57cee5f6c0646e59e41fbb25ba5a12821)

You can see the what the default formatting looks like at the top of the page. You can see what KEK's marked-up posts looked like before moderation underneath that. Presumably it looked better on Windows, with whatever the specified font was installed (I want to say Corbel?), but not everyone on this forum is using Windows or has all of the fonts from Windows 7 installed. As a moderator, I felt it made more sense in a case like this to trade off the ability to specify font and color choice in favor of ensuring that posts are legible across all platforms. Keep in mind I did not change any content at all, only removed font and color tags.

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 03, 2012, 12:25:49 AM

Quote from: mukade on December 02, 2012, 10:52:04 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 02, 2012, 10:42:22 PM
If it were to be deleted, it would be because you're being intentionally insulting and confrontational, not because you said ass.

Many posts in this thread seem to fit that definition. For example:

Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2012, 10:02:26 PM

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
IDiOT is funny and cool the first 30 times you see it. By the 500th time it's just stupid. We're all smart- let's come up with some fresh humor

It wasn't funny the first time.  It was lame.

There's a rather important difference between "that joke is not funny; it is lame" and "You wouldn't know humor if it hit you in your fat ass."

There is also "You wouldn't know lameness if it hit you in your fat ass."

Quote from: corco on December 02, 2012, 06:27:25 PM
it's just IDiOTic.

FIFY. :)

Quote from: kphoger on December 02, 2012, 11:20:06 PM
FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 03, 2012, 09:35:19 AM

Quote from: kphoger on December 02, 2012, 11:20:06 PM
FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Illinois DOT has just developed a certain reputation, especially with its surrounding neighbors, that the other 'I' states have not. It's just like the term 'FIB' is only used for Illinoisans as well (at least by those in Wisconsin).

Quote from: DaBigE on December 03, 2012, 10:15:23 AM

Illinois DOT has just developed a certain reputation, especially with its surrounding neighbors, that the other 'I' states have not. It's just like the term 'FIB' is only used for Illinoisans as well (at least by those in Wisconsin).

well, there's plenty of other states which receive needling from their neighbors.  here in SoCal, we have "zonies" from the state to our immediate east.

I maintain that the use of "IDiOT" is quite the aberration.

My thoughts:

*  Unusual fonts for body text in posts, besides "breaking" the formatting for people who don't have those particular fonts on their boxes, tend to attract this catty, not-very-nice reaction:  "Who is this person?  Why does he think he is too good to use the CSS default formatting?"  Freedom of expression is all well and good, but in this particular case I think the moderator's intervention has the effect--whether intended or not--of saving the poster from himself.

*  When I see "IDiOT" used as an acronym for "Illinois DOT," my reaction is not "Oh, how funny" or "Oh, how lame," but more like this:  "This poster really, really resents Illinois DOT.  In fact, he hates this DOT so much he doesn't care if repeated, ad nauseam use of 'IDiOT' puts other posters off what he is saying.  Do I want to get caught up in this emotional whirlpool?"  Since the answer is usually No, "IDiOT" tends to function as a cue to ignore not just that post but frequently the replies it attracts--why try to reason with someone in the grip of an idée fixe?  (For the same reason I try to limit the frequency of my own axe-grinding.)  Again, this is a case where I believe the moderators' intervention to discourage "IDiOT" amounts to saving a poster from himself.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 03, 2012, 09:35:19 AM

Quote from: kphoger on December 02, 2012, 11:20:06 PM
FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

Quote from: US71 on December 03, 2012, 12:21:40 PM
Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

I recall driving on the (then-fairly-new) Illinois Route 5 (East-West Tollway) (I-88 today) in the early 1980's between Aurora and Dekalb. It was like driving on a body of water with plenty of wave action, up and down.  I asked someone in Dekalb (not associated with ISTHA or IDOT) why the pavement was so "wavy," and was told that the subgrade was inadequate, and that the "wavy" pavement was going to have to be torn-up and the subgrade removed and reinstalled, and the the entire toll road repaved.

That same person also asserted that some (unknown) person or persons involved in the design and construction of Ill. 5 "ought to go to jail" for the condition of the road, but I don't know if there was ever an investigation or if anyone ended up behind bars as a result.

QuoteIf it's not stated in the posting guidelines, please do not edit posts just because of a personal formatting pet peeves. 

What needs to happen to get "please use default formatting unless you have a really, really good reason not to" into the forum guidelines? Because that really should be a rule. I've yet to see an instance where custom formatting makes things more readable or more useful- it's just annoying even if I do have the correct fonts installed.

Quotewhat gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Idaho is ITD, not IDOT. Indiana is INDOT. Iowa's roads are amazing.

Quotehere in SoCal, we have "zonies" from the state to our immediate east

Stupid utards

My only objection to "IDiOT" is that it's obvious and lacks creativity.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 03, 2012, 03:38:22 PM

Quote from: US71 on December 03, 2012, 12:21:40 PM
Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

I recall driving on the (then-fairly-new) Illinois Route 5 (East-West Tollway) (I-88 today) in the early 1980's between Aurora and Dekalb. It was like driving on a body of water with plenty of wave action, up and down.  I asked someone in Dekalb (not associated with ISTHA or IDOT) why the pavement was so "wavy," and was told that the subgrade was inadequate, and that the "wavy" pavement was going to have to be torn-up and the subgrade removed and reinstalled, and the the entire toll road repaved.

That would about the right time. I-57 north of Effingham had a similar problem.

Quote from: corco on December 03, 2012, 03:44:31 PM

QuoteIf it's not stated in the posting guidelines, please do not edit posts just because of a personal formatting pet peeves. 

What needs to happen to get "please use default formatting unless you have a really, really good reason not to" into the forum guidelines? Because that really should be a rule. I've yet to see an instance where custom formatting makes things more readable or more useful- it's just annoying even if I do have the correct fonts installed.

Seconded.

Quote from: US71 on December 03, 2012, 12:21:40 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 03, 2012, 09:35:19 AM

Quote from: kphoger on December 02, 2012, 11:20:06 PM
FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

Really?  They have spent billions upgrading and rehabbing the Chicago expressways, and the tollways.  All in all a very fine system of very complex and very expensive highways.

Then please add that [custom text formatting] to the posting guidelines. 

Quote from: Beltway on December 03, 2012, 05:40:49 PM

Quote from: US71 on December 03, 2012, 12:21:40 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 03, 2012, 09:35:19 AM

Quote from: kphoger on December 02, 2012, 11:20:06 PM
FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Well, Illinois has a bad rep for building roads cheaply than having to go back and fix them later. Or at least they did when I lived there.

Really?  They have spent billions upgrading and rehabbing the Chicago expressways, and the tollways.  All in all a very fine system of very complex and very expensive highways.

As we all go bump, bump, bumping along outside the Tri-State Tollway.  BTW, ISTHA uses its own money on its roads, fully separate from IDOT.

Quote from: Brandon on December 03, 2012, 07:54:02 PM

Quote from: Beltway on December 03, 2012, 05:40:49 PM
They have spent billions upgrading and rehabbing the Chicago expressways, and the tollways.  All in all a very fine system of very complex and very expensive highways.

As we all go bump, bump, bumping along outside the Tri-State Tollway.  BTW, ISTHA uses its own money on its roads, fully separate from IDOT.

I am well aware of those two agencies, and I also find the non-toll highways to be in decent shape overall.  Like I said, billions of dollars in reconstructions have been performed to the non-toll Chicago expressways that were originally built in the 1950s and 1960s.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 03, 2012, 09:35:19 AM

Quote from: kphoger on December 02, 2012, 11:20:06 PM
FWIW, I thought it was mildly funny the first time.  The second time made me cringe.  Every time it's been posted since then has made me want to stop reading the thread.

what gets me about the whole "IDiOT" thing is how a seemingly independent set of Illinois-based posters all seem to use it, while no other state DOT inspires an unhappy caricature of its acronym.  I have never seen Iowa, Idaho, or Indiana DOTs referred to as such - not even in the Indiana I-69 discussions which have been known to generate some strong discussions.

Once I found out that IDiOT was Illinois, it's helped me a lot when there's discussion about multiple "I" states.

Quote from: Steve on December 03, 2012, 05:36:22 PM

Quote from: corco on December 03, 2012, 03:44:31 PM

QuoteIf it's not stated in the posting guidelines, please do not edit posts just because of a personal formatting pet peeves. 

What needs to happen to get "please use default formatting unless you have a really, really good reason not to" into the forum guidelines? Because that really should be a rule. I've yet to see an instance where custom formatting makes things more readable or more useful- it's just annoying even if I do have the correct fonts installed.

Seconded.

Thirded.  Seeing posts in Calibri (not Corbel, to answer Scott's question (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8159.msg188487#msg188487)) drives me nuts.  I hate Calibri and Segoe UI as much as the strongest anti-Clearview people on here hate Clearview.  Even though I don't like Clearview, I still prefer it over Calibri and Segoe UI.  I find Calibri and Segoe UI to be blurry at smaller sizes, even though they were designed for Cleartype and LCDs.  Part of the blurriness might be do to the fact that I usually see the fonts used in Windows Vista and 7 where Cleartype is on by default, and I find Cleartype to be blurrier than regular text.  In the picture below, I think the text on the left is clearer, but the text on the right is darker.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.com%2Ftypography%2Fcleartype%2Ftuner%2Fcompare.gif&hash=cb0de86998dfdc716eae0bc0f66bf84cc39609f2)
Source: Microsoft's Windows XP Cleartype Tuner Webpage (http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/tuner/Step1.aspx)
</rant>

Back on topic, I don't think the forum is too moderated.  The only mod edit I can think of in one of my posts was by Steve when I forgot to close a quote tag.  As for bugo's opinion of post merging, I saw his posts before they were merged, and I thought it was somewhat annoying to have multiple posts in a row.  Why not just use the [h­r] tag (yay for the invisible character to make that show up!) or multiple quotes?  This post is an example of the multiple quote method.  If I'm using multiple quotes on more than one topic, I'll do something like this:

Quote
Topic 1, Quote 1

Response

Quote
Topic 1, Quote 2

Response

---

Quote
Topic 2, Quote 1

Response

I have seen some people here that are quick to jump on someone that they think is "doing it wrong" when they post something, but I won't point fingers.  Lastly, I haven't seen any "disappearing posts", but I don't pay that much attention.

How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Quote from: NE2 on January 02, 2013, 02:02:16 PM
How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Turned on the option to change vote. And the reason you were moderated is for violating our Terms of Use. It's temporary, and no, I had nothing to do with it.

You sure it's not because one of the mods has a stick up the ass about the military?

Quote from: NE2 on January 02, 2013, 10:08:20 PM
You sure it's not because one of the mods has a stick up the ass about the military?

That's unrelated, as far as I know.

Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2013, 09:47:58 PM

Quote from: NE2 on January 02, 2013, 02:02:16 PM
How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Turned on the option to change vote. And the reason you were moderated is for violating our Terms of Use. It's temporary, and no, I had nothing to do with it.

This:

Quote from: Steve on December 30, 2012, 09:00:42 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on December 30, 2012, 08:45:04 PM
"Yawn."  "Plonk."  What is this, the best of MTR?

We're dealing with it.

would suggest otherwise.

The moderation system allows us to issue points to users for posts which do not follow the forum guidelines. At a certain threshold all posts must be signed off on by a mod before they are displayed.  Multiple moderators can issue points contributing to someone reaching this threshold.

We're still having this conversation? Seriously? I know I'm new here, but I've seen nothing but good moderation being done. These guys clearly go by the book, and they hold no grudges against anyone. And I'm not just saying this to get brownie points, I don't believe in that. :nod:

Quote from: Molandfreak on January 03, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

Considering this is a member of the moderating team here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3658.msg171760#msg171760

I think a public discussion of moderation here is totally warranted.

Will this post score a boundary with the points system, or do I have the terminology wrong?

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 03, 2013, 03:14:46 PM
Considering this is a member of the moderating team here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3658.msg171760#msg171760

I think a public discussion of moderation here is totally warranted.

Will this post score a boundary with the points system, or do I have the terminology wrong?

Well, I have to give you credit. You got me to look at the International board for the first time. Guess I should quit being so xenophobic.  :-D :-D :-D

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 02, 2013, 11:01:09 PM
The moderation system allows us to issue points to users for posts which do not follow the forum guidelines. At a certain threshold all posts must be signed off on by a mod before they are displayed.  Multiple moderators can issue points contributing to someone reaching this threshold.

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 02, 2013, 10:47:08 PM

Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2013, 09:47:58 PM

Quote from: NE2 on January 02, 2013, 02:02:16 PM
How do I change my vote to yes? I have some "Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator." bullshit now.

Turned on the option to change vote. And the reason you were moderated is for violating our Terms of Use. It's temporary, and no, I had nothing to do with it.

This:

Quote from: Steve on December 30, 2012, 09:00:42 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on December 30, 2012, 08:45:04 PM
"Yawn."  "Plonk."  What is this, the best of MTR?

We're dealing with it.

would suggest otherwise.

That merely suggests that the mods ("we") are in discussion about it. I don't know exactly how they handle things, but it could be that Steve was outvoted.

Quote from: NE2 on January 02, 2013, 10:08:20 PM
You sure it's not because one of the mods has a stick up the ass about the military?

To whom are you referring?

Quote from: bugo on January 03, 2013, 01:58:34 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on January 03, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

Proof?

Quote from: bugo on January 03, 2013, 01:58:34 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on January 03, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

but you do.

contribute, or go away.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 03, 2013, 04:42:45 PM

Quote from: bugo on January 03, 2013, 01:58:34 PM

Quote from: Molandfreak on January 03, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
and they hold no grudges against anyone.

Bullshit.

but you do.

contribute, or go away.

As much as I like having this topic open, if we devolve into personal attacks, it will be locked. And don't say it's because "this forum is too moderated."

In terms of grudges, look, we're all human. We all make mistakes, hold grudges, etc. But the idea of a moderation team is that if one or two people dislike someone, the other mods keep them in line. I have called out other mods several times for perceived grudges, and they have done the same to me. I've defended a few members here when need be, and then again, I've tried to get a few banned. Not naming any names.

Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2013, 03:43:43 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 02, 2013, 11:01:09 PM
The moderation system allows us to issue points to users for posts which do not follow the forum guidelines. At a certain threshold all posts must be signed off on by a mod before they are displayed.  Multiple moderators can issue points contributing to someone reaching this threshold.

So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

In general, if we issue a warning, that user will know they have been warned. Sometimes we do make adjustments to the warning level without issuing a warning, but if a user becomes moderated or temp-banned, they will absolutely know about it. There are very few users ever on warning greater than 0% at any given time - I think the most I've seen is 4.

Quote
That merely suggests that the mods ("we") are in discussion about it. I don't know exactly how they handle things, but it could be that Steve was outvoted.

There wasn't a vote per se. The reason I responded the way I did was to try to stop the bickering in here by letting them know that yes, the mods are aware of what's going on. The ultimate resolution of the issue was done while I was at work.

Out of sheer curiosity, what are the stars for on the left, under the user name?

Yellow and Blue stars are set up for ranking by "experience" (posts).  Red stars: 1 = Regional Moderator (in charge of 1 or more boards), 3 stars - Global moderator, 4 stars - ask Steve, 5 stars - Admin.  Green Stars: 1 - DOT employee, 2 - contributes to AARoads.

Quote from: Steve on January 03, 2013, 10:58:35 PM
In general, if we issue a warning, that user will know they have been warned. Sometimes we do make adjustments to the warning level without issuing a warning, but if a user becomes moderated or temp-banned, they will absolutely know about it. There are very few users ever on warning greater than 0% at any given time - I think the most I've seen is 4.

I want to add on to this discussion to share that moderator approval of posts starts at a 30% warn level, and moderators typically adjust the warn level 5 to 10 points at a time, meaning you will almost always have to commit somewhere between three and six infractions before reaching the threshold. The level also gradually degrades over time, so if you find yourself above the 30% level and don't do anything to cause your warn level to be revised upward (either by behaving or simply taking a break from the forum), you will eventually be free to post without mod intervention.

In NE2's case, he received a 20 point warning for posting "yawn", two 10 point warnings for posting "yawn" two more times, and then a 10 point warning for calling another poster "extremely dense". His warning level is currently 35% due to automatic degradation since then.

A warn level above 90% "mutes" the user–they are still able to log in (i.e. they are not outright banned), but not post anything.

Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2013, 03:43:43 PM
So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 03, 2013, 03:14:46 PM
Considering this is a member of the moderating team here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3658.msg171760#msg171760

I think a public discussion of moderation here is totally warranted.

Will this post score a boundary with the points system, or do I have the terminology wrong?

What you seem to be overlooking here is that dtp was not posting in a mod capacity here. He is merely participating in the discussion, and while obviously frustrated, and maybe not exactly polite, I don't think this necessarily rises to the occasion of requiring moderator action. It also happened in September so it is much too late to do anything about it at this point. Were points to be issued for this post, it would only be 5 to 10, and would not bring dtp's warn level to the 30 points necessary to require moderator approval of posts (which would be a farce in any event, as I believe he would be able to approve his own posts).

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2013, 03:43:43 PM
So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

It does not show.

Too bad that there's not a scoreboard showing the warning level of all posters. Might make for some interesting competitions.  :-D

Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2013, 10:18:05 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2013, 03:43:43 PM
So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

It does not show.

Too bad that there's not a scoreboard showing the warning level of all posters. Might make for some interesting competitions.  :-D

You really want this place to look like MTR, or worse yet, the US Congress? :-P

Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 04, 2013, 10:35:01 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on January 04, 2013, 10:18:05 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2013, 03:43:43 PM
So do we get to see this scoreboard, or is it top-secret? How does anyone know if they're close to getting double-secret probation?

I may be mistaken, but you should be able to click the "profile" tab at the top of the page to get a display of your own warn level. The warn level is shown there for mods, and I think it will show for you, but I am not 100% certain. I don't think non-mods can view the warn levels of other posters.

It does not show.

Too bad that there's not a scoreboard showing the warning level of all posters. Might make for some interesting competitions.  :-D

You really want this place to look like MTR, or worse yet, the US Congress? :-P

Or like a blog I used to post on.  The owner instituted a ratings system and all hell broke loose.  If people want to see what grudges and vendettas are like, it was like that blog when the guy was kicking people off right and left when he didn't like something they said (whether right or wrong).  He really went nuts when some of them went and posted on other blogs.  I just left, sick of it.  Don't even know if the account is active or banned - don't care either.  I'm very glad that the level of moderation here is lower, but enough to keep it from looking like the free-for-all that MTR became.  As for grudges and vendettas here, I don't really see much of it based on previous experience.

I am in favor of allowing people to see their own warning levels in their profiles, together with comparative statistical information (average warning level, standard deviation of warning level, etc.) calculated across the active user population (i.e., the subset of registered users with a post frequency above a given level, say 10 posts per month).  Allowing self-help should head off some incidents where moderator intervention would otherwise be necessary.

I confirm H.B. is correct--I cannot see my warning level in my profile either.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM
In NE2's case ... a 10 point warning for calling another poster "extremely dense"

I was that other poster, and I took virtually zero offense at NE2's comment.  Do I get to request the 10-point penalty be rescinided?

Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on January 04, 2013, 10:35:01 PM
You really want this place to look like MTR, or worse yet, the US Congress? :-P

The competition could be to see who can keep their warning level the lowest.  :-D

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 05, 2013, 11:27:40 AM
I am in favor of allowing people to see their own warning levels in their profiles, together with comparative statistical information (average warning level, standard deviation of warning level, etc.) calculated across the active user population (i.e., the subset of registered users with a post frequency above a given level, say 10 posts per month).  Allowing self-help should head off some incidents where moderator intervention would otherwise be necessary.

I confirm H.B. is correct--I cannot see my warning level in my profile either.

I am in favor of you writing us a forum module that does this ;)

Quote from: kphoger on January 05, 2013, 02:16:49 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM
In NE2's case ... a 10 point warning for calling another poster "extremely dense"

I was that other poster, and I took virtually zero offense at NE2's comment.  Do I get to request the 10-point penalty be rescinided?

I am inclined to say no. Whether or not you personally took offense, it still constitutes bad conduct on his part and is a violation of the site rules. Allowing such conduct reflects badly on the forum (would you join a forum if you saw the established posters throwing ad hominem attacks back and forth instead of discussing things civilly?) and doesn't foster an environment that's conducive to polite discussion.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM
What you seem to be overlooking here is that dtp was not posting in a mod capacity here. He is merely participating in the discussion, and while obviously frustrated, and maybe not exactly polite, I don't think this necessarily rises to the occasion of requiring moderator action. It also happened in September so it is much too late to do anything about it at this point. Were points to be issued for this post, it would only be 5 to 10, and would not bring dtp's warn level to the 30 points necessary to require moderator approval of posts (which would be a farce in any event, as I believe he would be able to approve his own posts).

I'm not overlooking anything, nor am I asking for any punitive action to be taken (nor would you due to the laissez faire culture of moderation, though I do question having some 19 year old as a moderator).  However, he's a member of the moderation staff here, and should be held to a higher standard due to that responsibility.  You guys are tasked with maintaining decorum around here, and you should be doing that whether you choose to post in purple or not.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 05, 2013, 07:51:42 PM

I'm not overlooking anything, nor am I asking for any punitive action to be taken (nor would you due to the laissez faire culture of moderation, though I do question having some 19 year old as a moderator).  However, he's a member of the moderation staff here, and should be held to a higher standard due to that responsibility.  You guys are tasked with maintaining decorum around here, and you should be doing that whether you choose to post in purple or not.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

DTP was a moderator when the forum first started and was selected for his role by the previous administrator. His time as moderator during that period was solid... When the forum restarted in summer 2009, DTP and all other previous moderators were demoted to regular members so that we could start anew. DTP was considered to be moderator again based upon his performance during the first run of the forum. He has since garnered minmal (from me at least) negative attention that indicates that he should be demoted.

Comments/criticisms about a moderator's handling of a post/thread/situation are not unwelcome either. If we are to improve things on the board, we need to see all sides.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 04, 2013, 09:24:03 PM

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 03, 2013, 03:14:46 PM
Considering this is a member of the moderating team here:  https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3658.msg171760#msg171760

I think a public discussion of moderation here is totally warranted.

Will this post score a boundary with the points system, or do I have the terminology wrong?

What you seem to be overlooking here is that dtp was not posting in a mod capacity here. He is merely participating in the discussion, and while obviously frustrated, and maybe not exactly polite, I don't think this necessarily rises to the occasion of requiring moderator action. It also happened in September so it is much too late to do anything about it at this point. Were points to be issued for this post, it would only be 5 to 10, and would not bring dtp's warn level to the 30 points necessary to require moderator approval of posts (which would be a farce in any event, as I believe he would be able to approve his own posts).

Thank you. I think far too many people here don't seem to grasp the distinction between discussion and moderation. After all the drama that has gone on here I have sometimes considered resigning as a moderator just so that I can post without always feeling like someone is going to yell "MOD ABUSE!" if they don't like something I post. I thought this was why we used purple text, to distinguish moderation from regular posts, because we're people too, with opinions.

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 05, 2013, 07:51:42 PM
He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

I certainly did tell him to stop attacking me and consider re-reading my posts, since nothing seemed to be getting through to him, but even re-reading that post now I don't see anywhere that I threatened to use any moderator power on him.

---

Yeah, I've made questionable decisions.
Yeah, I've posted things I probably shouldn't.
Yeah, some of you probably hate me for it.
But I certainly do try and help out around here when I can, and I hope that people can put up with the occasional thing they don't like. If anyone really has a problem with anything I do, please, contact me. Just do please be polite about it, and do please be open to considering that maybe I was right, and please don't start a thread or make a post ranting about it. That's not productive.

Finally, I've heard this complaint time and time again, but age should be irrelevant when it comes to posting on a forum. I may be 19, but I've been a moderator on this forum since, what, 2008? And I'm a moderator on another, even larger, site as well, so I have experience moderating a forum. And I like to think I know a fair bit about roads too, since I've loved roads ever since I knew what they were, am currently a second year civil engineering student, and have work experience at a state DOT. Also, don't people of my generation generally have more skill with the internet anyway?

Now I hope this thread will please just die off.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 06, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
Finally, I've heard this complaint time and time again, but age should be irrelevant when it comes to posting on a forum. I may be 19, but I've been a moderator on this forum since, what, 2008?

From another young poster, thank you! :clap:

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 06, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
Now I hope this thread will please just die off.

I admire your optimism, but alas, I see no end in sight... There's always going to be someone here who doesn't like what's going on. They will have their reasons, be them good or bad (but mostly bad) :-/ :poke:

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 06, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
Now I hope this thread will please just die off.

Actually, I think discussion of moderation practices is a good thing, in the interests of an open and collegial board. I'm still smarting over a ban I got last winter, that came totally out of the blue and for no good reason whatsoever. I know who did it, but they've never acknowledged it to me, and I went over their head to get reinstated.

I would have appreciated the chance to discuss that openly, and with other mods and members of the forum weighing in about it.

To the best of my recollection, this is the first time I've mentioned that incident here. When I posted about it on Facebook, some of the other moderators were surprised to learn of it and that one mod had acted unilaterally. That's what I think ought to be more open; the discussion of and rationale behind such decisions. I don't think one mod should have the power to ban a member, lock a thread or remove posts. I think that should be a group decision among the mods. A consensus, if not an absolute majority-rules vote.

As for the age discussion, perhaps the younger generation generally has more experience with the Internet, but they don't have more experience with life. I've always respected my elders, but as my generation becomes the elders in society, I don't see that as much.

I would think that those who have been active in the hobby or interest of roads since the early days of MTR and Roadgeek would be given a lot more discretion, deference and latitude. There are an awful lot of people here that have been acquainted since around 1996 or so.

I don't see why age would be terribly relevant terms of moderation- I'd much rather have a level-headed, mature 17 year old (and there are plenty of those out there) moderating than a hot-headed, immature 40 year old (and there are plenty of those out there). Older folks tend to be more level headed and mature than younger folks, but there's so many outliers to that notion that it shouldn't be a primary factor in consideration.

Older folks who feel like they need to cite their age as a reason why they should be respected probably don't have any other reason to be respected. If somebody tells me "Respect me because I'm you're elder" I'm probably not going to take that very seriously. If somebody, as a result of their wisdom and life experience that can only (but does not always) come from age demonstrates that they deserve respect through their actions, I'll probably have deep respect for that- but it's the wisdom and life experience I'm respecting, not the age. For the record, I respect most, say, 80 year olds I meet because the vast majority demonstrate those qualities. A lot of 40 or 50 year olds haven't quite gotten there yet. 

Nutshell- I respect my elders because they have earned my respect, not because they're old. It's easier for me to respect an older person than a younger person, but there's plenty of young people I respect and plenty of old people I don't respect.

Well put corco.

Quote from: Alex on January 06, 2013, 11:36:54 AM

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 05, 2013, 07:51:42 PM

I'm not overlooking anything, nor am I asking for any punitive action to be taken (nor would you due to the laissez faire culture of moderation, though I do question having some 19 year old as a moderator).  However, he's a member of the moderation staff here, and should be held to a higher standard due to that responsibility.  You guys are tasked with maintaining decorum around here, and you should be doing that whether you choose to post in purple or not.

He may not have been posting as a mod, but he sure was threatening to use his powers.

DTP was a moderator when the forum first started and was selected for his role by the previous administrator. His time as moderator during that period was solid... When the forum restarted in summer 2009, DTP and all other previous moderators were demoted to regular members so that we could start anew. DTP was considered to be moderator again based upon his performance during the first run of the forum. He has since garnered minmal (from me at least) negative attention that indicates that he should be demoted.

Comments/criticisms about a moderator's handling of a post/thread/situation are not unwelcome either. If we are to improve things on the board, we need to see all sides.

And you totally missed the point of my post.  Cool!

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 06, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
words

Whatever.  If you get frustrated, back away from the fucking computer for a half hour.  That's what adults do.

Another thing that I feel needs to be stated is that age is just an indicator of how long you've been around and doesn't indicate how those years were spent. I have a friend who has lived in something like six countries and worked in four or five different industries. She's 25. Unless I had a reason to do otherwise, I respect her more than I would someone who is 60, worked one job the whole time, and never been outside Oklahoma, because although the latter guy has more time on this planet than her, my friend has much more experience in terms of having actually experienced a wider range of what life has to offer. Yet if one goes by a bland "respect your elders!" platitude we should give more respect to the old sheltered dude.

I bring this up because while I am only 22, I have many years of experience of Internet moderation–I joined my first online community at age 13, got my first moderation position (half-operator of an IRC channel) at 14, became a forum mod at 15, then Wikipedia admin at 18. So despite my low age compared to some posters, I like to think that I have amassed a valuable amount of experience in moderation, more so than you would think if you just looked at my age as a number.

Quote from: hbelkins on January 06, 2013, 03:43:00 PMTo the best of my recollection, this is the first time I've mentioned that incident here. When I posted about it on Facebook, some of the other moderators were surprised to learn of it and that one mod had acted unilaterally. That's what I think ought to be more open; the discussion of and rationale behind such decisions. I don't think one mod should have the power to ban a member, lock a thread or remove posts. I think that should be a group decision among the mods. A consensus, if not an absolute majority-rules vote.

In SABRE, when I acted as a moderator, we generally observed the following rules:

*  A member could be suspended only with the agreement of another elected officer.  (Moderators are all elected officers.)

*  A member could be permanently banned only after a vote of the active membership.

*  Posts were never deleted outright.  Instead, they were moved to an out-of-sight holding area.  This form of "soft deletion" was very rarely done.  Posts were generally not edited either except very occasionally to repair quoting problems (we never did forced post merges to nearly the same degree as AARoads, partly because--unlike AARoads--we allow users to view a list of most recent threads which is unsorted by board and is much more comprehensive than the "last few posts" panel at the bottom of the screen).  "Soft deletion" and post editing were at the sole discretion of an individual moderator, but with provision for oversight by the moderating team and by SABRE Committee as a whole.

Web forums present a learning curve for the membership and for the management.  Mistakes made at the beginning are less likely to be made later on.  For instance, a few years ago it was not uncommon for post edits to consist of paragraph deletions accompanied by snarks in purple text.  (This happened to me once, and I complained.)  Now that rarely happens because it has been realized that overt post edits other than for a clearly neutral purpose, such as quote repair, cause more trouble than they are worth.  They don't leave an audit trail that allows third parties to verify discretion was appropriately exercised, and they leave victims who believe justice is on their side and make demands for satisfaction which the forum is ill prepared to accommodate.  In the long run, it is just easier for both management and ordinary users to act as if they are housebroken, and to keep management responsibilities separate from feelings about individual users.

QuoteAs for the age discussion, perhaps the younger generation generally has more experience with the Internet, but they don't have more experience with life. I've always respected my elders, but as my generation becomes the elders in society, I don't see that as much.

I think most of those complaining about the youth of particular moderators are not protesting about lack of years per se, but rather about what they perceive as the absence of other positive qualities, such as life experience, maturity, evenness of temperament, people skills, etc.  There are some moderators on this board, such as Scott5411, who are unusual in bringing a considerable amount of natural ability to the job.  There are others who still have a little way to go in acquiring the arts of masterly inaction and of leaving a user feeling that an intervention has been facultative even if it has not gone in that user's favor.

QuoteI would think that those who have been active in the hobby or interest of roads since the early days of MTR and Roadgeek would be given a lot more discretion, deference and latitude. There are an awful lot of people here that have been acquainted since around 1996 or so.

I would not be in favor of such a policy, nor--frankly--do I see how seniority or grandfather protection for longtime MTR regulars serves the interests of the AARoads forum.  Surely such members, having seen (and, in some cases, participated in) MTR's decline at first hand, should be more keen to model good conduct to newcomers to the hobby?

There is one final point about the youth of moderators and how it relates to familiarity with the Internet.  I think the relevant feature here is not young people's stereotyped greater familiarity with the nuts and bolts of posting, but rather their much greater experience with forums which have much more heavy-handed moderation policies, much larger turnover of posters, and are commercially run in many cases (DigitalSpy comes to mind).  It is my impression--and it is only that--that some of the younger moderators have come to the AARoads forum with the idea of importing those boards' moderation policies, perhaps not having the life experience or people savvy to realize that this is not what the community as a whole wants.

My comments about youth are and were not intended to be applied to the moderation of this forum, but to roadgeekery/roads enthusiasm/roads scholarism and life in general.

I was a know-it-all kid once upon a time, fresh out of college and thinking I knew more than my new co-workers who had no college journalism degrees but plenty of real-life experience. Didn't take me long to understand that the people with years of real-life experience knew how things worked and how to handle certain situations a lot better than my wet-behind-the-ears book learnin' allowed me to understand.

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 06, 2013, 05:43:23 PM
And you totally missed the point of my post.  Cool!

My post was to address your continued contention that DTP is too young to be a moderator. My point is that he has been with us essentially since day one.

Quote from: hbelkins on January 06, 2013, 09:18:11 PMI was a know-it-all kid once upon a time, fresh out of college and thinking I knew more than my new co-workers who had no college journalism degrees but plenty of real-life experience. Didn't take me long to understand that the people with years of real-life experience knew how things worked and how to handle certain situations a lot better than my wet-behind-the-ears book learnin' allowed me to understand.

If you can get admitted, a Harvard undergraduate degree will set you back about $35,000 per year.  Real life, on the other hand, is the most expensive tuition there is.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 06, 2013, 05:43:49 PM
Another thing that I feel needs to be stated is that age is just an indicator of how long you've been around and doesn't indicate how those years were spent. I have a friend who has lived in something like six countries and worked in four or five different industries. She's 25. Unless I had a reason to do otherwise, I respect her more than I would someone who is 60, worked one job the whole time, and never been outside Oklahoma, because although the latter guy has more time on this planet than her, my friend has much more experience in terms of having actually experienced a wider range of what life has to offer. Yet if one goes by a bland "respect your elders!" platitude we should give more respect to the old sheltered dude.

I bring this up because while I am only 22, I have many years of experience of Internet moderation–I joined my first online community at age 13, got my first moderation position (half-operator of an IRC channel) at 14, became a forum mod at 15, then Wikipedia admin at 18. So despite my low age compared to some posters, I like to think that I have amassed a valuable amount of experience in moderation, more so than you would think if you just looked at my age as a number.

I think the idea of 'respect' is a rather nebulous term, so I'll use your friend as an example.  On one level, my first reaction is to have more 'respect' for the 60-year-old man, simply because I value commitment, and his career record seems to demonstrate that value.  Others on here have expressed other reasons for naturally tending to respect their elders.  There may also be things about him that someone might find more 'respectable'–take your pick as to what value or quality you find respectable.

Someone who greatly values a free spirit, stretching yourself, and living young would likely tend to have more 'respect' for the 25-year-old lady.  There may also be things about her that someone might find more 'respectable'–again, take your pick as to what value or quality you find respectable.  And, again, this is all what someone's first reaction might be.  Our opinions of people will always evolve the more we get to know someone.  And also keep in mind that this is all hypothetical:  I obviously don't actually know either person, and I don't intend for these words to accurately describe either one.

But, here's my point:  None of that necessarily means one or the other would make a better moderator for a forum, just as none of it necessarily means one or the other would make a better parent, teacher, softball umpire, or cook.  The 60-year-old has the greater life experience of time, but the 25-year-old has the greater life experience of diverse culture.  The 25-year-old has maybe not learned yet when to keep quiet (J N Winkler's masterly inaction?), but the 60-year-old has maybe learned it to a fault and no longer knows how to take a stand.  The 25-year-old has maybe never been caught up in feuds and left trampled in the process, but the 60-year-old has maybe become bitter and cynical.

So let's just take age out of the equation, and break the word down into what it really means to us:  experience.  Experience should matter, age should not.  Now, what sort of experience should be valued most highly is another topic of discussion (working for a DOT, moderating other forums, dealing with conflicts in other areas of life, etc.), and maybe that's the more pertinent question.

---

ps  I'm 31 years old, have never moderated a forum, and frequently put my foot in my mouth.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 06, 2013, 10:46:55 PM
If you can get admitted, a Harvard undergraduate degree will set you back about $35,000 per year.  Real life, on the other hand, is the most expensive tuition there is.

astonishing how many fools seem to scrape the tuition together.

Quote from: corco on January 06, 2013, 03:47:56 PM
I don't see why age would be terribly relevant terms of moderation- I'd much rather have a level-headed, mature 17 year old (and there are plenty of those out there) moderating than a hot-headed, immature 40 year old (and there are plenty of those out there). Older folks tend to be more level headed and mature than younger folks, but there's so many outliers to that notion that it shouldn't be a primary factor in consideration.

At a board I moderate, we've had some 16-year-old mods, ranging to those which are 50+. As the board has been around over ten years, the moderation age has increased in kind; roughly half of us are in our 30's. The admins were/are all over the age of 30 (save the site owner). Simply put, a good mod is a good mod, and admittedly, having a little young blood never hurts when those of us become less and less hip to the latest whatchamacallit do-dad thingamabob on the intertubes. If even a "youngster" can act with maturity when dealing with troublemakers, then other younger members have less problem falling in line (as needed), rather than feeling as if they're pushed around by older members.

On the other hand, there's always going to be a few troublemakers that leverage age into their stereotypical rant against the moderators; either they're/we're "adults with no life" or "some punk kid with nothing better to do". You'd figure general public's use and awareness of the internet over the past twenty years might shatter some of those tired-out quips, but I suppose that's expecting too much.

Quote from: Alex on January 06, 2013, 09:42:09 PM

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 06, 2013, 05:43:23 PM
And you totally missed the point of my post.  Cool!

My post was to address your continued contention that DTP is too young to be a moderator. My point is that he has been with us essentially since day one.

So you're just going to ignore the broader point I raised.  Okie dokie.

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 10, 2013, 02:30:48 PM

So you're just going to ignore the broader point I raised.  Okie dokie.

Which is?

Got this as a private message tonight:

Quote from: AARoads Forum
Your signature is in violation of our site's policy against harrassing other users. While I know you and NE2 have your spats, please remove the line from your signature and don't use it against other users again. Thank you.

OK, two questions:

1.) Who's "I?" Makes this sound like one person's decision.

2.) That was my signature for weeks. Took "you" that long to notice it?  :-D :-D :-D

Funny that I never noticed your signature until now, when it's gone. :P

As is usual with such things, this simmered overnight and came to a full boil.

It's funny that a moderator (and I'm not picking on the one in question) can openly mock him in his signature, and get by with it -- probably because it is funny -- but someone else speaks the truth and gets slapped on the wrist.

It's also funny how certain people seem to constantly violate guideline #18, but nobody seems to care.

This also calls to mind another point I made upthread. There are several of us who've been around since the early days of M.T.R. and Roadgeek, I couldn't name all of us if I tried, but a few others are Doug K., Jeff K., Adam P., US 71, Jeremy, Froggie, and yes, even SPUI. (Apologies if I left anybody out). I would think that holding senior roadgeek/enthusiast/scholar status would allow for a whole lot more latitude vs. some newbie who just got here and who nobody knows. And I'd think that if some who aren't here, like C.C. Slater and Mark Roberts came aboard, they'd also get similar senior status deference.

For all the M.T. R. flamewars and Facebook drama over the years, this place has caused more heartburn than both of them combined. It seems like you have to be extra-careful not to offend someone's sensibilities.

(Wonder if this little rant will get my warning level raised from its current 10 percent? I'm now on the "moderator watch list." Is that anything like being on the suspected terrorist list?  :-D )

I'm surprised a Moderator called you on this. We have regularly discussed people's sig lines and the consensus has been to take a hands-off policy on such things.  Either the policy changed when I wasn't looking or someone has gone rogue.  Was there an ID attached to the message?

What is "Rule #18"?  The forum posting guidelines are unnumbered.

I echo US 71's surprise about this action--given the controversy it was likely to cause, I would have expected the moderator to sign his name and to make it clear the action had buy-in from the "committee" (whatever it is actually called).

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 14, 2013, 10:40:20 AM
What is "Rule #18"?  The forum posting guidelines are unnumbered.

I echo US 71's surprise about this action--given the controversy it was likely to cause, I would have expected the moderator to sign his name and to make it clear the action had buy-in from the "committee" (whatever it is actually called).

Quote from: Alex

• Pointless cursing.

^^^^

The answer, HB, is the moderation that occurs is totally haphazard and lazy which is why you get users like ShawnP spouting their jibberish-laden remarks ad infinitium with zero repercussions.  The quality of information received here has degraded (General Highway Discussion devolving into the Post Your Favorite [X] folder being a prime example) since I joined to the point that my account is only good for keeping track of unread posts.

I got one of their scary warnings for pointing out this fact, supposedly "insulting" them, in a private manner and totally within the system.  Too bad I'm done working within the system.

What was so wrong with your sig for the multiple weeks it was up?

Whatever, eventually I'll push the right buttons and get banned, and the sun will still rise that morning.  Senior members of the forum deserve a better moderation staff.  Unlike bugo's whining, the forum isn't too moderated.  What little moderation there is is applied poorly.

If we're going to go that far back, we might as well talk about such gems (read: "guessing" fests that did nothing but inflate post counts) as "guess the highway" and "guess the aerial image".

Quote from: deanej on January 14, 2013, 11:49:07 AM
If we're going to go that far back, we might as well talk about such gems (read: "guessing" fests that did nothing but inflate post counts) as "guess the highway" and "guess the aerial image".

don't forget "Voyager's Cosmic b'Bar", which I believe lowered the collective IQ of the species by a point or two.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 14, 2013, 11:56:04 AM

Quote from: deanej on January 14, 2013, 11:49:07 AM
If we're going to go that far back, we might as well talk about such gems (read: "guessing" fests that did nothing but inflate post counts) as "guess the highway" and "guess the aerial image".

don't forget "Voyager's Cosmic b'Bar", which I believe lowered the collective IQ of the species by a point or two.

I remember the name but not what it was...care to help me out here?

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 14, 2013, 12:04:44 PM

I remember the name but not what it was...care to help me out here?

it was just V'ger freaking out and posting incoherent, occasionally ranty shit while drunk - and encouraging others to do the same.  had nothing to do with roads; I think it was his own form of primal scream therapy.

Quote from: InterstateNG on January 14, 2013, 11:19:56 AMThe answer, HB, is the moderation that occurs is totally haphazard and lazy

Over-moderation is annoying, but capricious moderation - where occasionally the normally relaxed moderation goes heavy-handed is far worse.

The problem here seems to be very occasional lack of consultation with others and slightly more frequent failure to own decisions. There are perhaps too many cooks also. Generally the moderation is a perfectly fine lassie-faire translucent kind of approach, but from time to time there's a "what's all that about?" Anything contentious appears from my outsider POV to occur most of the time without consultation between mods and almost every time some poor moderation occurs, the moderator has been anonymous.

Quote from: Roadsguy on January 14, 2013, 07:46:38 AM
Funny that I never noticed your signature until now, when it's gone. :P

I thought that signature no less of a harassment than HB's target was using.  His target, quite frankly, has been using harassing/mocking signatures for quite some time.  HB's was pretty straight forward by comparison, IMHO.

Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2013, 09:36:42 AM
I'm surprised a Moderator called you on this. We have regularly discussed people's sig lines and the consensus has been to take a hands-off policy on such things.  Either the policy changed when I wasn't looking or someone has gone rogue.  Was there an ID attached to the message?

I appreciate you, of all people, making this statement. There was no name attached, only "AA Roads Forum" and a reply to the PM would not go through because no recipient was specified.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 14, 2013, 10:40:20 AM
What is "Rule #18"?  The forum posting guidelines are unnumbered.

I echo US 71's surprise about this action--given the controversy it was likely to cause, I would have expected the moderator to sign his name and to make it clear the action had buy-in from the "committee" (whatever it is actually called).

As someone else pointed out, it's cursing. The rules aren't numbered, but I counted just so people would go look.  ;-)

I could have remained quiet about it and no one would have ever known, but since this thread's ongoing for a discussion of moderation practices here, I felt it was legitimate to point out.

Quote from: english si on January 14, 2013, 12:25:19 PMThe problem here seems to be very occasional lack of consultation with others and slightly more frequent failure to own decisions. There are perhaps too many cooks also. Generally the moderation is a perfectly fine laissez-faire translucent kind of approach, but from time to time there's a "what's all that about?" Anything contentious appears from my outsider POV to occur most of the time without consultation between mods and almost every time some poor moderation occurs, the moderator has been anonymous.

I'd echo these observations as well.  I don't really object to HB being required to change or delete his signature on the basis that allowing sigs to be used to snipe at other users breeds unnecessary discord and bad feeling, but it is much better if the person demanding this action is identified by name, doing so with the agreement (secured through prior discussion) of the other moderators, and in accordance with a policy that is given a reasonable amount of advance publicity.  In fact, if you publish the policy in advance you reduce the need to tell people to change sniping sigs:  this is part of how you get to masterly inaction.

You also don't use selective enforcement of an agreed policy to get at people who annoy you.  Either you don't enforce the policy at all, both against your friends and against your enemies, or you enforce it both against your friends and your enemies.  This means that if HB is asked to dump his sig on the basis that it is a snipe aimed at a specific person, NE2 gets asked to dump his sig in the same way and for the same reason.

You also do what is necessary to address confirmation bias, which in this case tends to take the form of seeing the misbehavior of your enemies (perhaps because you have made it your personal project to "keep tabs" on them?) and not seeing the misbehavior of your friends (perhaps because you trust them to behave without surveillance?).

Quote from: hbelkins on January 14, 2013, 01:14:11 PM

Quote from: US71 on January 14, 2013, 09:36:42 AM
I'm surprised a Moderator called you on this. We have regularly discussed people's sig lines and the consensus has been to take a hands-off policy on such things.  Either the policy changed when I wasn't looking or someone has gone rogue.  Was there an ID attached to the message?

I appreciate you, of all people, making this statement. There was no name attached, only "AA Roads Forum" and a reply to the PM would not go through because no recipient was specified.

I just want to say that the action was done before being discussed with the rest of the crew.  We do know who did it, but will not mention who did it publicly yet until we give him a chance to respond to the rest of the crew on why he did it.

Quote from: rickmastfan67 on January 14, 2013, 07:34:51 PM
I just want to say that the action was done before being discussed with the rest of the crew.  We do know who did it, but will not mention who did it publicly yet until we give him a chance to respond to the rest of the crew on why he did it.

No need to mention it publicly, as far as I'm concerned.

I am a relative outsider...I've been here for about a year and I've made some contributions, but i have yet to attend a meet. I've thought about attenting one, but haven't found one convenient to me yet.  to me, the moderation seems to be pretty transparent, but I have yet to commit a foul.  I wasn't around in the M.T.R. days.

But I will say, from an outsiders standpoint, that some of the snipping and nitpicking between what I'm guessing are long-time members does make me think twice and be particularly careful of what I post, as I don't want to get in the middle of any of the conflicts that seem to crop up from time to time.  So, I tend to be more of a reader and less of a participant because of that.

...just an outsiders point-of-view, for what that may worth.  I suppose it all depends on how open to outsiders the general collective wants this forum to be.

I'm recusing myself from further moderating actions because I have found myself to be untrustworthy with it. I'm sticking with post editing, which I know I'm good at.

If consensus is that insulting sigs are OK, I'll change mine to:
"X blows goats and I have proof" = "I have a video of said goat-blowing in my porn folder, along with the nudes of my sister and cousin"

Quote from: NE2 on January 14, 2013, 10:36:01 PM
If consensus is that insulting sigs are OK, I'll change mine to:
"X blows goats and I have proof" = "I have a video of said goat-blowing in my porn folder, along with the nudes of my sister and cousin"

Reminds me - I need to watch "Wayne's World" again.

Quote from: NE2 on January 14, 2013, 10:36:01 PM
If consensus is that insulting sigs are OK, I'll change mine to:
"X blows goats and I have proof" = "I have a video of said goat-blowing in my porn folder, along with the nudes of my sister and cousin"

TFTMS  :banghead: :pan:

I miss the MTR days.  You could say whatever you wanted to without worry of repercussions.  The strange thing is that in the early days of MTR there was no fighting.  Everybody got along great.  Then some teenage noobs came along and ruined it for everybody, and it started spiraling down.  Then the trolls came in and took over, and now it's a joke.

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 07:47:31 AM
I miss the MTR days.  You could say whatever you wanted to without worry of repercussions.  The strange thing is that in the early days of MTR there was no fighting.  Everybody got along great.  Then some teenage noobs came along and ruined it for everybody, and it started spiraling down.  Then the trolls came in and took over, and now it's a joke.

Which is what we're trying to keep from happening again here.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 15, 2013, 08:45:48 AM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 07:47:31 AM
I miss the MTR days.  You could say whatever you wanted to without worry of repercussions.  The strange thing is that in the early days of MTR there was no fighting.  Everybody got along great.  Then some teenage noobs came along and ruined it for everybody, and it started spiraling down.  Then the trolls came in and took over, and now it's a joke.

Which is what we're trying to keep from happening again here.

Here we can at least block most of the SPAM for Chinese shoes, and adult video sites  :clap:

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 15, 2013, 08:45:48 AM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 07:47:31 AM
I miss the MTR days.  You could say whatever you wanted to without worry of repercussions.  The strange thing is that in the early days of MTR there was no fighting.  Everybody got along great.  Then some teenage noobs came along and ruined it for everybody, and it started spiraling down.  Then the trolls came in and took over, and now it's a joke.

Which is what we're trying to keep from happening again here.

You're trying way too damn hard. 

Well, we're succeeding and that's what matters. 

Quote from: NE2 on January 14, 2013, 10:36:01 PM
"I have a video of said goat-blowing in my porn folder, along with the nudes of my sister and cousin"

In that case, there's definitely no point of going through the motions again. Although, if it was Chinese shoe porn...

You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

Well, there's no viatologists here that I know of, so it's nowhere near mtr yet.

Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 12:11:44 PM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

Well, there's no viatologists here that I know of, so it's nowhere near mtr yet.

We just have to keep the wannabe Trolls in line  :pan: :pan:

Quote from: US71 on January 15, 2013, 12:15:40 PM
We just have to keep the wannabe Trolls in line  :pan: :pan:

And have what happens in Alanland stay in Alanland.

Quote from: US71 on January 15, 2013, 12:15:40 PM

Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 12:11:44 PM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

Well, there's no viatologists here that I know of, so it's nowhere near mtr yet.

We just have to keep the wannabe Trolls in line  :pan: :pan:

And you end up harming serious posters while you do it.

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

I'm sure that people in MTR's early days wouldn't have believed that MTR would become what it is today.

Quote from: deanej on January 15, 2013, 12:39:17 PM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

I'm sure that people in MTR's early days wouldn't have believed that MTR would become what it is today.

No, we didn't.  We thought that kind of nonsense was for the alt.* groups.

One thing I do disagree with, and may agree to disagree with, is the constant post merges.  A fair number of them are overkill IMHO.

What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

I can see it when the posts address the same issue or comment, but when they address different comments, I don't really see the point to post merges.

Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 02:56:31 PM

One thing I do disagree with, and may agree to disagree with, is the constant post merges.  A fair number of them are overkill IMHO.

I don't care if someone merges my posts; so long as I don't get warned about it.

I read the forum in a manner which I believe is unlike that of the majority: look at "recent posts" regardless of topic or board - so if several posts trigger a reply from me, I may or may not notice that they are in the same thread and therefore will end up posting consecutively.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

If they are three different thoughts, then yes.

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

I usually try to go back and edit/update my posts

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 03:26:28 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

If they are three different thoughts, then yes.

As we've pointed out before, different thoughts can be separated by one of these babies:

---

See? This is one thought.

---

And this is another!

My current issue has been settled and all is well. I will speak no more of it.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 15, 2013, 10:58:43 AM
Well, we're succeeding and that's what matters. 

That sounds so incredibly Nazi.

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:32:49 PM

Quote from: US71 on January 15, 2013, 12:15:40 PM

Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 12:11:44 PM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 12:03:02 PM
You'd still be succeeding if you didn't try as hard.  There's no way this forum is going to end up like MTR.  Hyperbole much?

Well, there's no viatologists here that I know of, so it's nowhere near mtr yet.

We just have to keep the wannabe Trolls in line  :pan: :pan:

And you end up harming serious posters while you do it.

Agreed. I'm also tired of the moderation we've been doing, which is why I'm no longer going to take part in it. I'm going to speak out against our current moderation practices. We should be fixing quotes and typos and adhering to the guidelines. Far too often I see people's personal tastes and prejudices creep in. For example, someone is going to try to merge this post with my previous one, and I will do nasty things to that person's cat.

Quote from: Brandon on January 15, 2013, 03:08:44 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

I can see it when the posts address the same issue or comment, but when they address different comments, I don't really see the point to post merges.

I agree with Brandon strongly. Scott, have you really not figured out how to turn off sig lines in posts? It's a basic forum setting. If something annoys YOU, why don't you fix it for YOU, instead of imposing your will on everyone else?

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 15, 2013, 04:36:56 PM

Quote from: bugo on January 15, 2013, 03:26:28 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2013, 02:59:49 PM
What is the purpose of a string post? Is there any real reason to have the same avatar and signature three times in a row because someone posted three separate posts, when we could have it once with no loss of content or clarity?

If they are three different thoughts, then yes.

As we've pointed out before, different thoughts can be separated by one of these babies:

---

See? This is one thought.

---

And this is another!

CAN be. Not MUST be.

Yeah, but you're still filling up the "Recent Posts" list which is really, really annoying and actually hinders navigability.

Honestly, can somebody explain to me why the fuck somebody merging your posts is so terrible beyond the fact that it's perceived as overmoderation? You're not losing any content, it just makes the forum more legible and doesn't spam the recent posts lists.

Quote from: corco on January 15, 2013, 11:18:50 PM
Yeah, but you're still filling up the "Recent Posts" list which is really, really annoying and actually hinders navigability.

Honestly, can somebody explain to me why the fuck somebody merging your posts is so terrible beyond the fact that it's perceived as overmoderation?

Overmoderation is not a good thing. The best moderators go unnoticed. Also, I tend to visit and post all around the forum at once. So no matter what, your recent posts feed is going to fill up with me. Tough shit, I'm not going to space out my posting for someone else's feed.

But why is it overmoderation? You're not losing any content!

If you're in different conversations, I know multiple threads are active and that's cool, but I gain nothing by seeing 9 "New post in x by Steve" when they're all identical

Quote from: corco on January 15, 2013, 11:21:51 PM
But why is it overmoderation? You're not losing any content!

If you're in different conversations, I know multiple threads are active and that's cool, but I gain nothing by seeing 9 "New post in x by Steve" when they're all identical

If they're all identical, then something is very wrong somewhere. My posts are not identical. Each of them is responding to a different aspect of the conversation.

In my recent post lists at the bottom of the screen which I and I know others use to see what's going on when checking real quick, I see 5 of the 9 slots occupied by:

Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)
Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)
Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)
Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)

That's really obnoxious. What that says to me is not "oh hey,there's a conversation going on there" but "oh hey, that person really wants to be heard" which means I'm probably not interested in what they have to say.

Quote from: corco on January 15, 2013, 11:26:06 PM
In my recent post lists at the bottom of the screen which I and I know others use to see what's going on when checking real quick, I see 5 of the 9 slots occupied by:

Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)
Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)
Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)
Re: Is this forum too moderated? by Steve (Off-Topic)

That's really obnoxious. What that says to me is not "oh hey,there's a conversation going on there" but "oh hey, that person really wants to be heard" which means I'm probably not interested in what they have to say.

We're friends off-forum. Let's discuss it there rather than clogging up other people's news feeds with our back and forth.

See what I did there?

Also, you did come over here and post, so clearly you were interested in what I had to say.

A question and an observation:

*  When someone posts and then edits that post, does it generate a new instance in "Recent Posts" or bump an existing instance to the top?

*  Posts that are produced in a single posting session but contain substantive comment at some length won't take up a high percentage of the slots in "Recent Posts" unless the forum is going through a period of prolonged inactivity.

Quote*  When someone posts and then edits that post, does it generate a new instance in "Recent Posts" or bump an existing instance to the top?

No- note that I edited the previous post at 9:28 or whatever time zone but the "Recent Posts" kept the 9:26 stamp

Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into notging but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into notging but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

And this is why some of us are saying you're too young to be a moderator.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into notging but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

Then take the middle road.  That's all I'm asking.

Speaking of drama and of being dramatic...

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into notging but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

I don't think anyone called you a Nazi yet, but you do win the Godwin's Law Award for being the first to being it up.  Some posts should be merged and some should not, but it's all content-based, not just because they appear next to each other.  No one's suggesting you are the equivalent of the Soup Nazi.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

At least you did not open a new thread for your dramatic announcement; nevertheless, please respect the sentiment providing the foundation for Rule 16:

Quote
- Opening a thread announcing that you're leaving. Sorry, but no one really cares.

Quote from: corco on January 15, 2013, 11:18:50 PM
Yeah, but you're still filling up the "Recent Posts" list which is really, really annoying and actually hinders navigability.

I had not thought of it that way.  I use the "recent posts" view and it doesn't bother me at all.

QuoteHonestly, can somebody explain to me why the fuck somebody merging your posts is so terrible beyond the fact that it's perceived as overmoderation? You're not losing any content, it just makes the forum more legible and doesn't spam the recent posts lists.

again, I don't care if someone does it - so long as I am not warned for doing things the "other way".  yes, I realize that makes me guilty of, effectively, littering and expecting others to pick up after me, but I've only noted maybe 2-3 times since I've been on this forum that someone has merged my posts into one.

The thing is that post merging isn't moderation. There's no moderating taking place- it's purely a stylistic change, which is why I don't get why people get offended by it.

And that's important- a uniform style allows for more focus on the words being said, which fosters a higher quality of discussion. Even if it seems trivial, it's absolutely important and a uniform style is one of the things that keeps this place from devolving into MTR.

That said, there's two routes to uniform style- one is to always merge posts, and the other is to kill the post merge tool. In reality, I think either one is acceptable but lets commit to one or the other and realize that at the end of the day, which choice is made really, really doesn't matter. Both styles have their pros and cons, and a perfect solution doesn't exist within the technical limitations of the forum.

Quote from: NE2 on January 14, 2013, 10:36:01 PM
If consensus is that insulting sigs are OK, I'll change mine to:
"X blows goats and I have proof" = "I have a video of said goat-blowing in my porn folder, along with the nudes of my sister and cousin"

Just don't take that to Alanland.  Penalty for such an offense is having to watch an endless loop of the 6-3 Browns win over Seattle last year.

Quote from: corco on January 16, 2013, 09:40:34 AM
a uniform style allows for more focus on the words being said, which fosters a higher quality of discussion.

How?

---

Quote from: corco on January 16, 2013, 09:40:34 AM
it's purely a stylistic change

Agreed.  As such, why not let the author of the post(s) decide how best to express their multiple thoughts? Uniformity for uniformity's sake alone is pointless.  A legitimate basis for having a uniform style would make sense, which is why I asked the question in section one of this post.

Quote from: Steve on January 16, 2013, 12:18:34 AM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into notging but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

And this is why some of us are saying you're too young to be a moderator.

I don't see what's immature about that? Something an immature little kid would do is go and post something with lots of foul language complaining about people, and then go on some rampage editing things they shouldn't, and deleting things, and wreaking havoc, like a certain someone whose name begins with V did.

---

Quote from: Brandon on January 16, 2013, 07:12:28 AM
Speaking of drama and of being dramatic...

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into notging but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

I don't think anyone called you a Nazi yet, but you do win the Godwin's Law Award for being the first to being it up.  Some posts should be merged and some should not, but it's all content-based, not just because they appear next to each other.  No one's suggesting you are the equivalent of the Soup Nazi.

Actually, someone did call me a Nazi:

Quote from: Steve on January 15, 2013, 11:13:31 PM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 15, 2013, 10:58:43 AM
Well, we're succeeding and that's what matters. 

That sounds so incredibly Nazi.

So no, I was not the first to bring that up.

---

Quote from: Grzrd on January 16, 2013, 08:11:06 AM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

At least you did not open a new thread for your dramatic announcement; nevertheless, please respect the sentiment providing the foundation for Rule 16:

Quote
- Opening a thread announcing that you're leaving. Sorry, but no one really cares.

I did not "announce" I was leaving, and don't consider myself to have violated that guideline: the point of it was to tell people it's not acceptable to clutter up the forum with threads saying things like "I'm going away for a week" or "I need to focus on other things and am leaving this forum for now" or "Screw you guys, I'm going home". Not to enforce against people who say in a post that they're taking a break or are going to lay off moderating for a while. If you truly wanted to enforce that guideline that anally, I guess we ought to go back and warn everyone who ever posted about a roadtrip they're going on, or mentioned in a post that they'll be gone for a while (which I have seen multiple times).
It wasn't the clearest sentence, but I was trying to say that I was done for the night, and that I am done trying to moderate you guys because I'm sick of things like this.

This is another example.

You guys always want to have a discussion, but I get the same reaction if I post something perfectly civil like my last post as I would if I horribly disfigured the forum.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 11:33:58 AM
I did not "announce" I was leaving

Really? How else was I suppose to understand the below?:

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

---

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 11:33:58 AM
I ... don't consider myself to have violated that guideline

Read my post again. I did not say that you violated the guideline.

---

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 11:33:58 AM
I am done trying to moderate you guys because I'm sick of things like this.

Am I correct in interpreting this statement as an announcement that you will no longer attempt to moderate on this Forum?

QuoteHow?

Uniformity in itself promotes professionalism, and professionalism inherently promotes higher quality content, whether consciously processed or not. SaMe rEaSoN i WoUlD gEt In TrOuBlE fOr PoStInG lIkE tHiS- it's still readable, and my content is the same, but you very likely would process a body of posts that read like that in a different way than if I posted normally- the focus would be on the way the words are written and not on the words, which makes people process the thought differently. If everybody posted with alternating capital letters, regular readers would probably get used to it (which is why if we settle on one standard that's fine), but outsiders would think we're fucking crazy. That's an extreme example, but the same applies to post merges/not merging. If people do it in different ways, that's going to cause the way things are posted to be interpreted differently, which detracts from the conversation.

Quote from: corco on January 16, 2013, 02:50:15 PM
the focus would be on the way the words are written and not on the words

In a post-merge, the moderator does not change the way the words are written; the moderator merely merges them into one post.  Your example changed the way the words were written. Post-merge or no post-merge, the focus does not depart from the words.

---

Quote from: corco on January 16, 2013, 02:50:15 PM
the same applies to post merges/not merging. If people do it in different ways, that's going to cause the way things are posted to be interpreted differently, which detracts from the conversation.

There are countless examples of post-merges on this forum.  Please provide one concrete example where a post-merge caused you to interpret a post differently.

As little problem as I have with post merges, I too contest the idea that merging posts or keeping them separate fosters uniformity in any meaningful way.  I'd say far more difference in meaning is conveyed by sentence structure, spelling and grammar, length of post, vocabulary, paragraphing, use of quotes, style, and more than by merging or segregating posts.

In the example of capitalization, I agree that the way we process the information changes with alternating capital letters.  But that, to my thinking, is nothing akin to any treatment of multiple posts.  I think our minds are quite capable of skipping over the additional header in the case of separate posts, or creating a separation in the case of a single post with multiple points–much more so than of handling the way the words themselves are actually written.  In short, I really don't see myself interpreting things differently based on that criterion, and it's hard for me to imagine someone else doing so–at least, more than based on myriad other criteria which are in no way contested.

QuoteThere are countless examples of post-merges on this forum.  Please provide one concrete example where a post-merge caused you to interpret a post differently.

I can't provide a concrete example of an opinion, but you knew that already. Any time it happens, my first thought is "why didn't that person just write one post?" Then I think "they must be trying to cause trouble" and then I take what they say less seriously.

That said! If we changed the uniform standard to allow for consecutive posts and ditched the post merge function, I probably wouldn't think of those that way. I'm still not in favor of that because I like that recent post lists and it does cause more scrolling, but as I said it isn't a huge deal.

I find it fitting that this topic has 264 posts in it while a topic I started about a brand new road extension that has never been mentioned on this forum has one reply.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 11:33:58 AM

Quote from: Steve on January 16, 2013, 12:18:34 AM

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on January 16, 2013, 12:11:47 AM
Oh yes, I'm a Nazi since I think we've done a good job of keeping this forum from devolving into nothing but spam and trolls and MTR-ness.

I feel like I can't win here. One week I have someone sending me angry PMs saying we don't moderate enough, now I have a fellow moderator calling me a Nazi.

You guys are way too god damn dramatic. I'm done. I can't stand this forum for more than a week or two at a time before something drives me away again, so I guess I'll just love roads on my own.

And this is why some of us are saying you're too young to be a moderator.

I don't see what's immature about that? Something an immature little kid would do is go and post something with lots of foul language complaining about people, and then go on some rampage editing things they shouldn't, and deleting things, and wreaking havoc, like a certain someone whose name begins with V did.

Maturity is something that comes in stages.  Most of us are mature enough not to react to opposition as Voyager (or whatever his name was) did.  But another stage of maturity is not to react to criticism (whether constructive or not) by throwing toys out of the pram, which is what "I'm done.  I can't stand this forum more than one week at a time," etc. amounts to.

Not every post needs a response.  It also doesn't necessarily serve the forum's best interests to have the standard sanction applied to every instance of a rule violation.  Sometimes there is no good solution to a particular problem, so the best you can do is to demonstrate an effort to act equitably and with good will.  And while some moderating actions may cry out for a public defense, the motivation for offering such should always be building confidence in the integrity of the moderators, never self-exculpation or burnishing one's own reputation.

When I was acting as the chief moderator for SABRE, I had to referee a case where Party B insulted Party A.  Party B's wife had just given birth to a new baby, and in a thread dealing with the special extra-width parent-and-child parking spaces that are provided at many British supermarkets, Party A implied that people who have children (and thus use parent-and-child parking spaces) are selfishly free-riding on the community at large.  Party B's insult was a heated response to this comment, so while he had broken the rules, he had done so under provocation.

When Party A's complaint came in by PM, I sent a PM to Party B acknowledging that he had acted under provocation but telling him that he should not do it again.  He apologized for the insult and I passed this on to Party A, telling him that I proposed to take no further action.  The next I heard from Party A was a complaint, made in the public part of the forum and repeated on several separate occasions, that he had been publicly insulted and the moderating team had allowed Party B to get away scot-free.

What did I do at this point?  I said nothing.  I felt I had handled the situation appropriately, by dealing with the parties in confidence so that neither would experience the humiliation (which I thought unnecessary) of a public slapdown or forced apology.  Since no other member of the forum seemed inclined to take up Party A's complaints, I felt there was nothing to be gained, and possibly much to be lost, by exposing this particular moderating decision to the public gaze.  Did it irritate me to be accused of unfairness and partiality?  Of course.  Did I vent this irritation in a public part of the forum?  Never.

Quote from: corco on January 16, 2013, 02:50:15 PMSaMe rEaSoN i WoUlD gEt In TrOuBlE fOr PoStInG lIkE tHiS- it's still readable...

I disagree. That's not readable at all. It takes a lot of effort to read that mixed cap crap. It's the posting version of the duck face photograph.

Oh, and Steve. Don't hurt the cat. It's an innocent furry little thing.   :D

Much of this discussion is very familiar to me, as I'm an admin/moderator on a few forums myself.

It's true that "you can't win." Don't look at it as "winning" anything. Know going into it that not everyone is going to agree with what you do, but if you are following the guidelines for moderating that particular forum, that is what matters. See a post that probably belongs merged with an existing thread? Merge it in there. See a post that belongs in a different subforum or category? Move it there. Someone uses foul language or is trolling? Warn them (if your forum supports that) and hide/edit the post - and give the reason why ("violated Terms Of Service Rule #5" or whatever).

I'm more than happy to talk to someone via PM or email or whatever if there's an issue. I'm not at all happy when someone decides to air it out in a new or existing thread.

For what it's worth, I don't think this forum is over-moderated at all. In some instances, it could probably use a little MORE moderation, but only because there are a few users that should really know better.

QuoteI disagree. That's not readable at all. It takes a lot of effort to read that mixed cap crap. It's the posting version of the duck face photograph.

Yeah, That Was Probably An Excessive Example. Maybe I Should Have Said It's Like Posting Like This...Still Readable But Really Annoying To Read

Quote from: corco on January 16, 2013, 10:21:07 PM

QuoteI disagree. That's not readable at all. It takes a lot of effort to read that mixed cap crap. It's the posting version of the duck face photograph.

Yeah, That Was Probably An Excessive Example. Maybe I Should Have Said It's Like Posting Like This...Still Readable But Really Annoying To Read

I. Read. That. Like. Stopping. After. Every. Word. Like. This.

Or  like  that   guy    with   a   sticky   spacebar...

Quote from: NE2 on January 16, 2013, 11:16:36 PM
Or  like  that   guy    with   a   sticky   spacebar...

|O|

Quote from: hbelkins on January 16, 2013, 09:56:05 PM
duck face

going off topic, can anyone explain this meme to me?  knowyourmeme.com isn't very helpful other than to note "yep, it happens".

My interpretation of the "duck face" meme:  the pout is supposed to be sexy (in a pre-Raphaelite sort of way) but in practice comes across as self-conscious and silly.

Quote from: J N Winkler on January 17, 2013, 12:52:05 PM
My interpretation of the "duck face" meme:  the pout is supposed to be sexy (in a pre-Raphaelite sort of way) but in practice comes across as self-conscious and silly.

not a duckface:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fe%2Fe2%2FDante_Gabriel_Rossetti_-_Proserpine.JPG%2F220px-Dante_Gabriel_Rossetti_-_Proserpine.JPG&hash=2a210625f6f80ee0249c76d6de6a7565740ba63a)

not my thing (I actually like it when girls are happy and they smile, but maybe I'm just a pervert) - but still that pout is miles ahead of the duck.

Yup--that's my take--the duck face is a failed attempt to look like that.

Also the nickname of one of the brides in Four Weddings and a Funeral, who has that pout

This forum isn't moderated enough?  Are you mad?  In your mind, did the Patriot Act not go far enough?

Quote from: bugo on January 17, 2013, 02:38:06 PM
This forum isn't moderated enough?  Are you mad?  In your mind, did the Patriot Act not go far enough?

dude, just quit being a butthead solely for the sake of being a butthead.

these sorts of posts do not offer anything new to the discourse, other than cement your reputation as an obstinate little asshole whose sole purpose is to troll the forum.  now, if that is your intent, go ahead and carry on, but I get the idea that you're actually attempting to be reasonable, and just aren't particularly good at it. 

come back when you've got some basic social skills.

Quote from: bugo on January 17, 2013, 02:38:06 PM
This forum isn't moderated enough?  Are you mad?  In your mind, did the Patriot Act not go far enough?

How much did you have to drink this morning?  I haven't seen much of suggesting that the forum isn't moderated enough.  For many folks here, it seems to be moderated just enough - not too much, not too little.

And what the fuck does the Patriot Act have to do with this forum?  As much, more or less than the price of tea in China?

Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2013, 03:03:58 PM
And what the fuck does the Patriot Act have to do with this forum?

There needs to be a version of Godwin's Law that replaces "Nazi" with "Patriot Act".

Quote from: formulanone on January 17, 2013, 03:16:28 PM

Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2013, 03:03:58 PM
And what the fuck does the Patriot Act have to do with this forum?

There needs to be a version of Godwin's Law that replaces "Nazi" with "Patriot Act".

The Bugo Corollary to Godwin's Law.  :D

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 02:54:11 PM

come back when you've got some basic social skills.

Holy shit, we could have a field day with this. I'll just call you Blackpot.

Quote from: Steve on January 17, 2013, 05:36:28 PM

Holy shit, we could have a field day with this. I'll just call you Blackpot.

I thought I'd be Blackkettle.  (Blackettle?  okay, Blackpot it is; more aesthetically pleasing spelling.)

honestly, when was the last time I got into a protracted war with the board admins, complete with begging for a moderator position (ha), threatening to troll the forum into oblivion (yay), and then following up with the same intentional complete lack of understanding, day after day, insulting the intelligence of the forum's administration?  when have I done any sort of thing like that?

I'll admit I have my List of Usual Suspects which I rail against (mainly politicians, border guards, and those who have poor font selection skills), but generally speaking I doubt I am on the same page of "irritating assclown" as the behavior being demonstrated here.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 06:54:48 PM

Quote from: Steve on January 17, 2013, 05:36:28 PM

Holy shit, we could have a field day with this. I'll just call you Blackpot.

I thought I'd be Blackkettle.  (Blackettle?  okay, Blackpot it is; more aesthetically pleasing spelling.)

honestly, when was the last time I got into a protracted war with the board admins, complete with begging for a moderator position (ha), threatening to troll the forum into oblivion (yay), and then following up with the same intentional complete lack of understanding, day after day, insulting the intelligence of the forum's administration?  when have I done any sort of thing like that?

I'll admit I have my List of Usual Suspects which I rail against (mainly politicians, border guards, and those who have poor font selection skills), but generally speaking I doubt I am on the same page of "irritating assclown" as the behavior being demonstrated here.

Seriously, though, can we not launch personal attacks on this forum? That's kinda against the Terms and Guidelines and such.

Quote from: Steve on January 17, 2013, 07:05:56 PM
Seriously, though, can we not launch personal attacks on this forum? That's kinda against the Terms and Guidelines and such.

What cocksmoker put that in the rules?

Quote from: NE2 on January 17, 2013, 08:04:59 PM

Quote from: Steve on January 17, 2013, 07:05:56 PM
Seriously, though, can we not launch personal attacks on this forum? That's kinda against the Terms and Guidelines and such.

What cocksmoker put that in the rules?

Like him?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F3%2F34%2FThe_Smoking_Man_%28X-Files%29.jpg&hash=f3ae149fa3792cd9a951cdbbe97f3c75c7bcfbf8)

It took 4 years and 9 days for the first X-Files reference on this forum. We can all go home now!

Quote from: corco on January 17, 2013, 09:14:44 PM
It took 4 years and 9 days for the first X-Files reference on this forum. We can all go home now!

Have you ever spent any time in Alanland?:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7720.msg183776#msg183776

Oh gosh darn it. We could all have gone home two months ago!

Quote from: Grzrd on January 17, 2013, 09:31:11 PM

Quote from: corco on January 17, 2013, 09:14:44 PM
It took 4 years and 9 days for the first X-Files reference on this forum. We can all go home now!

Have you ever spent any time in Alanland?:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7720.msg183776#msg183776

I need to stop in Willoughby on the way ;)

I'd just like to say that I think the moderators on this forum do an excellent job of keeping up with the bazillion different topics, keeping threads in the right categories, allowing off-topic tangents to continue until the point of no return, curtailing them once they've reached that point–in what seems to me to be quite a professional manner (especially considering this is, after all, a web forum).

And all that, while still managing to lend their expert knowledge to the threads themselves–which is of great worth in my opinion.

Beers all 'round, guys!   :cheers:

Quote from: kphoger on January 17, 2013, 10:00:49 PM
I'd just like to say that I think the moderators on this forum do an excellent job of ... allowing off-topic tangents to continue until the point of no return

Speaking of points of no return:

Quote from: US71 on January 17, 2013, 09:48:07 PM
I need to stop in Willoughby on the way ;)

Please provide a detailed field report as to whether there is a completed Willoughby Bypass.  ;-)

Quote from: kphoger on January 17, 2013, 10:00:49 PM
I'd just like to say that I think the moderators on this forum do an excellent job of keeping up with the bazillion different topics, keeping threads in the right categories, allowing off-topic tangents to continue until the point of no return, curtailing them once they've reached that point–in what seems to me to be quite a professional manner (especially considering this is, after all, a web forum).

And all that, while still managing to lend their expert knowledge to the threads themselves–which is of great worth in my opinion.

Beers all 'round, guys!   :cheers:

Crap, me without my beer.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 12:56:22 PM
I actually like it when girls are happy and they smile, but maybe I'm just a pervert

:rofl: :clap: :nod:

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 12:56:22 PM
I actually like it when girls are happy and they smile, but maybe I'm just a pervert

That makes two perverts here then, I guess, as I fully agree with you.

Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2013, 11:31:48 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 12:56:22 PM
girls

That makes two perverts here then, I guess, as I fully agree with you.

Use of the plural does raise the question of observation vs. participation.

Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2013, 11:31:48 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 12:56:22 PM
I actually like it when girls are happy and they smile, but maybe I'm just a pervert

That makes two perverts here then, I guess, as I fully agree with you.

I am also more attracted to ladies who don't look like they could beat me up.  Is that un-American?

Quote from: kphoger on January 18, 2013, 02:12:17 PM

Quote from: Brandon on January 17, 2013, 11:31:48 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 17, 2013, 12:56:22 PM
I actually like it when girls are happy and they smile, but maybe I'm just a pervert

That makes two perverts here then, I guess, as I fully agree with you.

I am also more attracted to ladies who don't look like they could beat me up.  Is that un-American?

Nah, just old-fashioned (and I tend to agree with you, hence my isolating that quote in the first place).

I don't know about you guys, but I'm attracted to goats. Only the female ones, mind you.

Quote from: NE2 on January 18, 2013, 02:43:11 PM
I don't know about you guys, but I'm attracted to goats. Only the female ones, mind you.

How about driving that Goat? ;) The GTO was once nicknamed the Goat.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.chevyhardcore.com%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F12%2FPRIIMG_6567.jpg&hash=3fd5f46a9344b4597e621de90db47a396aad1f77)

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on January 22, 2013, 05:50:50 PM
The GTO was once nicknamed the Goat.

We've already discussed this ad nauseam and there's no point in going through the motions again.

I frequent the Unexplained Mysteries forum, and a few others I occassionally go to, and each one is moderated in a different level of checks and balances. I do take interest in forum politics (cautiously), but when a moderator asks me to do something, I adhere to what they request or suggest. I don't think the forum is overmodded, IMO it's managed in the right pace.

I believe forums should allow members to ask questions to the site staff when an issue arises. I used to run my own based on a cartoon series "Totally Spies" 5 years ago and usually the banned are spambots, and had been fair with members in rule violations. I witnessed a fair share of "e-drama" on them, yet I hadn't seen anything on AAroads of a dramatic immature fashion.

I see irony that "Stalin" feels there is too much regulation... :D

I am aware that this is an old thread, but I don't think so. Personally, I think that the mods let a whole lot more slide than I would if I were a mod.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 05, 2021, 05:39:26 PM
I am aware that this is an old thread, but I don't think so. Personally I think that the mods let a whole lot more slide than I would if I were a mod.

You mean like restarting 8-year-old threads?

Nice bump. And no

Quote from: kkt on May 05, 2021, 05:53:40 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 05, 2021, 05:39:26 PM
I am aware that this is an old thread, but I don't think so. Personally, I think that the mods let a whole lot more slide than I would if I were a mod.

You mean like restarting 8-year-old threads?

Um kind of. I think that bumping threads is allowed on the forum as long as you add something to the conversation. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. I bumped the 6-year-old thread on pathetic state clinches and it started some new discussion which was good.

You're getting a little impatient with new posts, aren't you?

Quote from: Alps on December 01, 2012, 10:09:17 PM
Definition of "necro": Bringing back an old post WITHOUT ADDING SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT.

Seriously. Dude. It's not hard. Even for you.

I don't think this is an appropriate topic for revival, for reasons not least of which include the fact that when it was created we had an entirely different set of moderators. (Notice how many people on the first couple of pages are now sporting some form of mod banner in their user info block.) And we've had the "is this forum too moderated" discussion in dozens of other iterations, so there's really no reason to revive this one in particular.